ArticleBMJ open2022
Hospital-wide SARS-CoV-2 antibody screening of 4840 staff members in a University Medical Center in France: a cross-sectional study.
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 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthcare workers in Dutch hospitals after the 2020 first wave: a multicentre cross-sectional study with prospective follow-up.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesHealthcare workers are more likely to be infected by SARS-CoV-2. In order to assess the infectious risk associated with working in a hospital, we sought to estimate the proportion of healthcare professionals infected with SARS-CoV-2 by screening staff in a University Medical Center in France.
settingA hospital-wide screening campaign (comprising a serological test and a questionnaire) ran from 18 May to 26 July 2020. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The seroprevalence rate was analysed in a multivariate analysis according to sociodemographic variables (age, sex and profession), exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and symptoms.
resultsA total of 4840 professionals were included, corresponding to 74.5% of the centre's staff. The seroprevalence rate (95% CI) was 9.7% (7.0% to 12.4%). Contact with a confirmed case of COVID-19 was significantly associated with seropositivity (OR (95% CI: 1.43, (1.15 to 1.78)). The seroprevalence rate was significantly higher among nursing assistants (17.6%) than among other healthcare professionals. The following symptoms were predictive of COVID-19: anosmia (OR (95% CI): 1.55, (1.49 to 1.62)), ageusia (1.21, (1.16 to 1.27)), fever (1.15, (1.12 to 1.18)), myalgia (1.03, (1.01 to 1.06)) and headache (1.03, (1.01 to 1.04)).
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.