Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35314468›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal infection trends in England, February-July 2020.

Nicola K Love, Alex J Elliot, Rachel M Chalmers, Amy Douglas, Saheer Gharbia, Jacquelyn McCormick, Helen Hughes, Roger Morbey, Isabel Oliver, Roberto Vivancos and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Mind the gap! TypingMicrobial genomics · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Public health surveillance ofJournal of medical microbiology · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicola K LoveUK Health Security Agency, London, UK nicola.love@phe.gov.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-3750-7158
Alex J ElliotUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6414-3065
Rachel M ChalmersCryptosporidium Reference Unit, Public Health Wales Microbiology and Health Protection, Singleton Hospital, Swansea, UK.
Amy DouglasUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Saheer GharbiaUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Jacquelyn McCormickUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Helen HughesUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Roger MorbeyUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Isabel OliverUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Roberto VivancosUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Gillian SmithUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4257-0568
University of Liverpool · GBUK Health Security Agency · GBKing's College London · GBNational Institute for Health Research · GBNational Security Agency · USSingleton Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo establish the impact of the first 6 months of the COVID-19 outbreak response on gastrointestinal (GI) infection trends in England.

designRetrospective ecological study using routinely collected national and regional surveillance data from seven UK Health Security Agency coordinated laboratory, outbreak and syndromic surveillance systems using key dates of UK governmental policy change to assign phases for comparison between 2020 and historic data.

resultsDecreases in GI illness activity were observed across all surveillance indicators as COVID-19 cases began to peak. Compared with the 5-year average (2015-2019), during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 response, there was a 52% decrease in GI outbreaks reported (1544 vs 3208 (95% CI 2938 to 3478)) and a 34% decrease in laboratory confirmed cases (27 859 vs 42 495 (95% CI 40 068 to 44 922)). GI indicators began to rise during the first lockdown and lockdown easing, although all remained substantially lower than historic figures. Reductions in laboratory confirmed cases were observed across all age groups and both sexes, with geographical heterogeneity observed in diagnosis trends. Health seeking behaviour changed substantially, with attendances decreasing prior to lockdown across all indicators.

conclusionsThere has been a marked change in trends of GI infections in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The drivers of this change are likely to be multifactorial; while changes in health seeking behaviour, pressure on diagnostic services and surveillance system ascertainment have undoubtably played a role, there has likely been a true decrease in the incidence for some pathogens resulting from the control measures and restrictions implemented. This suggests that if some of these changes in behaviour such as improved hand hygiene were maintained, then we could potentially see sustained reductions in the burden of GI illness.

Indexed as

COVID-19Communicable Disease ControlEnglandFemaleHumansMalePandemicsPopulation SurveillanceRetrospective StudiesCOVID-19epidemiologygastrointestinal infections

Identifiers

PMID35314468
PMCPMC8968111
OpenAlexW4220760582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.