ArticleSaudi medical journal2021
SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among healthcare workers from a tertiary care center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence among healthcare workers: A cross-sectional study at a quaternary healthcare center in Saudi Arabia.Journal of infection and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo calculate the seroprevalence of asymptomatic healthcare workers (HCWs) in our institution.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study among asymptomatic HCWs in a large hospital during the peak of the pandemic (from July to August 2020 and followed them up until February 2021) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. We collected the data in a Microsoft Word document after collecting a single serum sample for detection of antibodies from each participant then we compared the results statically in Microsoft Excel tables.
resultsWe enrolled 188 participants and measured their IgG antibodies from venous blood samples using CLIA. Six (3.2%) had positive antibodies despite being asymptomatic. Most of these were from non-COVID-19 working areas (4 out of 6), but all had an exposure with a positive COVID-19 patient at some point in the preceding 2 months.
conclusionsOur results are consistent with similar local studies showing low seroprevalence among HCWs while most positive cases are from non-COVID-19 areas. Despite this low seroprevalence, HCWs are still considered a high-risk group; hence, there is a need to encourage strict implementation and adherence to infection control measures and vaccination among HCWs, especially when these measures are relaxed on the national level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.