SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2022
The role of routine SARS-CoV-2 screening of healthcare-workers in acute care hospitals in 2020: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility of molecular-based testing strategies for SARS-CoV-2-screening in workplaces: a systematic review and reporting checklist.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Risk of COVID-19 infection among frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.World journal of virology · 2025Article
- Asymptomatic testing people for SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare facilities: A systematic review.Journal of public health in Africa · 2025Review
- Detection of Common Respiratory Infections, Including COVID-19, Using Consumer Wearable Devices in Health Care Workers: Prospective Model Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- The effects of public health and social measures (PHSM) implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic: An overview of systematic reviews.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2024Review
- Observational
- Mitigating healthcare worker risk during the COVID-19 pandemic - experience from a large tertiary maternity centre in the United Arab Emirates.Journal of medicine and life · 2023Article
- Asymptomatic Healthcare Worker PCR Screening during SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Surge, Germany, 2022.Emerging infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Infection prevention and control between legal requirements and German Society for Hygiene and Microbiology expert assessments: a cross-sectional study in September-November 2022.The Journal of hospital infection · 2023Article
- Designing Digital COVID-19 Screening: Insights and Deliberations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- The Implementation of a Health Care Worker Screening Program Based on the Advanta RT-qPCR Saliva Assay in a Tertiary Care Referral Hospital in Northern Greece.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Evidence for the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and olfactory cell lineage impairment in close-contact infection Syrian hamster models.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Prognosis of COVID-19 in the middle eastern population, knowns and unknowns.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare workers (HCW) are at increased risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2. Vulnerable patient populations in particular must be protected, and clinics should not become transmission hotspots to avoid delaying medical treatments independent of COVID. Because asymptomatic transmission has been described, routine screening of asymptomatic HCW would potentially be able to interrupt chains of infection through early detection.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Web of Science and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus with regard to non-incident related testing of healthcare workers using polymerase chain reaction on May 4th 2021. Studies since January 2020 were included. An assessment of risk of bias and representativeness was performed.
resultsThe search identified 39 studies with heterogeneous designs. Data collection of the included studies took place from January to August 2020. The studies were conducted worldwide and the sample size of the included HCW ranged from 70 to 9449 participants. In total, 1000 of 51,700 (1.9%) asymptomatic HCW were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 using PCR testing. The proportion of positive test results ranged between 0 and 14.3%. No study reported on HCW-screening related reductions in infected person-days. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsThe heterogeneous proportions might be explained by different regional incidences, lock-downs, and pre-analytical pitfalls that reduce the sensitivity of the nasopharyngeal swab. The very high prevalence in some studies indicates that screening HCW for SARS-CoV-2 may be important particularly in geographical regions and pandemic periods with a high-incidence. With low numbers and an increasing rate of vaccinated HCW, a strict cost-benefit consideration must be made, especially in times of low incidences. Since we found no studies that reported on HCW-screening related reductions in infected person-days, re-evaluation should be done when these are available.
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.