ArticleCommunications medicine2022
A 2-month field cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva of BNT162b2 vaccinated nursing home workers.
Article in Communications medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Towards deployable CRISPR-based nucleic acid detection.Progress in biomedical engineering (Bristol, England) · 2026Review
- SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in Belgian French-Speaking Primary Schools: An Epidemiological Pilot Study.Viruses · 2022Article
- Epidemiological and Serological Analysis of a SARS-CoV-2 Outbreak in a Nursing Home: Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and Enhanced Neutralizing Immunity Following Breakthrough Infection.Microorganisms · 2022Article
- Diagnosis ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Factors influencing the adoption and participation rate of nursing homes staff in a saliva testing screening programme for COVID-19.PloS one · 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
19 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nursing home (NH) residents have been severely affected during the COVID-19 pandemic because of their age and underlying comorbidities. Infection and outbreaks in NHs are most likely triggered by infected workers. Screening for asymptomatic NH workers can prevent risky contact and viral transmission to the residents. This study examined the effect of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID‑19 (Comirnaty Methods: A 2-month cohort study was conducted among 99 NHs in the Walloon region (Belgium), at the start of February 2021. Three groups of workers, i.e., non-vaccinated ( Results: The protection fraction against the excretion of the SARS-CoV-2 in the saliva samples of the workers after the second dose is estimated at 0.90 (95% CI: 0.18; 0.99) at 1 week and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.54; 0.95) at 8 weeks. We observe more circulating SARS-CoV-2 and a greater variability of viral loads in the unvaccinated group compared to those of the vaccinated group. Conclusions: This field cohort study advances our knowledge of the efficacy of the mRNA BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine on the viral shedding in the saliva specimens of vaccinated NH workers, contributing to better decision-making in public health interventions and management.
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.