Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35670286›Full record

ArticleScandinavian journal of work, environment & health2022

Occupation and SARS-CoV-2 infection risk among 108 960 workers during the first pandemic wave in Germany.

Marvin Reuter, Mariann Rigó, Maren Formazin, Falk Liebers, Ute Latza, Stefanie Castell, Karl-Heinz Jöckel, Karin Halina Greiser, Karin B Michels, Gérard Krause and 22 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. SARS-CoV-2 infection risk by non-healthcare occupations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Occupation and SARS-CoV-2 in Europe: a review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

32 authors at 18 institutions in 2 countries.

Marvin ReuterInstitute of Medical Sociology, Centre for Health and Society, Medical Faculty and University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University Duesseldorf Moorenstrasse 5, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany. marvin.reuter@uni-duesseldorf.de.
Mariann Rigó
Maren Formazin
Falk Liebers
Ute Latza
Stefanie Castell
Karl-Heinz Jöckel
Karin Halina Greiser
Karin B Michels
Gérard Krause
Stefan Albrecht
Ilter Öztürk
Oliver Kuss
Klaus Berger
Benedikt M J Lampl
Michael Leitzmann
Hajo Zeeb
Karla Romero Starke
Sabine Schipf
Claudia Meinke-Franze
Wolfgang Ahrens
Andreas Seidler
Bianca Klee
Tobias Pischon
Andreas Deckert
Börge Schmidt
Rafael Mikolajczyk
André Karch
Barbara Bohn
Hermann Brenner
Bernd Holleczek
Nico Dragano
Düsseldorf University Hospital · DEFederal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health · DEGerman Cancer Research Center · DEInstitut für Medizinische Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie · DELeibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS · DEMartin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg · DERobert Koch Institute · DETechnische Universität Dresden · DEUniversitätsmedizin Greifswald · DEUniversity of Regensburg · DEUniversity of Ulster · GBDeutsches Diabetes-Zentrum e.V. · DEGerman Center for Infection Research · DEHeidelberg University · DEHelmholtz Association of German Research Centres · DEHelmholtz Centre for Infection Research · DEKrebsregister Saarland · DEUniversity of Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this study was to identify the occupational risk for a SARS-CoV-2 infection in a nationwide sample of German workers during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (1 February-31 August 2020).

methodsWe used the data of 108 960 workers who participated in a COVID follow-up survey of the German National Cohort (NAKO). Occupational characteristics were derived from the German Classification of Occupations 2010 (Klassifikation der Berufe 2010). PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections were assessed from self-reports. Incidence rates (IR) and incidence rate ratios (IRR) were estimated using robust Poisson regression, adjusted for person-time at risk, age, sex, migration background, study center, working hours, and employment relationship.

resultsThe IR was 3.7 infections per 1000 workers [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.3-4.1]. IR differed by occupational sector, with the highest rates observed in personal (IR 4.8, 95% CI 4.0-5.6) and business administration (IR 3.4, 95% CI 2.8-3.9) services and the lowest rates in occupations related to the production of goods (IR 2.0, 95% CI 1.5-2.6). Infections were more frequent among essential workers compared with workers in non-essential occupations (IRR 1.95, 95% CI 1.59-2.40) and among highly skilled compared with skilled professions (IRR 1.36, 95% CI 1.07-1.72).

conclusionsThe results emphasize higher infection risks in essential occupations and personal-related services, especially in the healthcare sector. Additionally, we found evidence that infections were more common in higher occupational status positions at the beginning of the pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsGermanyHumansOccupationsSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID35670286
PMCPMC9888438
OpenAlexW4281971825

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.