ReviewCureus2022
Frontliners on the Move: A Quantitative Analysis of the Prevalence of COVID-19 Reinfection Among Healthcare Workers.
Review in Cureus, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Hybrid Immunity and the Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Reinfections during the Omicron Era in Frontline Healthcare Workers.Vaccines · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 11 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study was conducted to review relevant articles and demonstrate the prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reinfection among healthcare workers (HCWs). A systemic search was conducted on PubMed and Medline from their inception to July 17, 2021. All statistical analyses were conducted using ReviewManager 5.4.1. Studies meeting the following inclusion criteria were selected: (a) articles having HCWs with COVID-19; (b) studies describing reinfection of COVID-19; and (c) articles having a defined number of patients and controls. Three studies were selected for meta-analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the cohort studies. NOS scores of 1-5 were considered high risk for bias, scores of 6-7 were deemed moderate, and scores >7 were considered low risk for bias. A random-effect model was used when heterogeneity was seen to pool the studies, and the results were reported in inverse variance (IV) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Pooled prevalence of reinfection of COVID-19 in HCWs was 3% (OR: 0.03 [-0.04, 0.01]; p=0.44;
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.