ArticleFrontiers in public health2021
A Cross-Sectional Survey to Assess Biorisk Management System in Research and Diagnostic Laboratories in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation of a Biorisk Management System in Armenia for ISO 35001:2019 Certification.Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association · 2026Article
- A Mentorship Program to Develop Biorisk Manuals for Laboratories in Pakistan.Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Financial, cultural, and managerial hurdles have made biosafety and biosecurity measures difficult in resource-constrained countries like Pakistan. Because of increasing awareness of biorisk management, diagnostic and research laboratories have made major advances in biosafety and biosecurity in the recent decade. As a result, identifying and addressing gaps in biorisk management has never been more critical. The purpose of this study was to assess the current situation of personal protective equipment (PPE), biosafety behavior, waste management, biosafety and biosecurity measures, training and safety, and health services in diagnostic and research laboratories across Pakistan's Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province. We adapted the WHO Laboratory Assessment tool (2012) and CWA 15793 (Biorisk management guidelines) for conducting a cross-sectional survey, which was distributed among various laboratories in KP. The survey included 30 laboratories, including 11 diagnostic and 19 research laboratories. In comparison to diagnostic laboratories, biorisk management practices in research laboratories were better in terms of PPE, biosafety behavior, waste management, biosafety measures, biosecurity measures, trainings, and safety and health services. KP laboratories' biorisk management practices have improved over time, according to our findings. However, we were able to identify inadequacies that would require considerable improvements to the current setups based on the WHO and CWA 15793 recommendations. Organizations can tailor their biosafety measures and training to address identified gaps using the presented KP snapshot.
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.