Authors' response: Occupation and SARS-CoV-2 infection risk among workers during the first pandemic wave in Germany: potential for bias.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Determining intra-standard-setter inconsistency in the Angoff method using the three-parameter item response theory.International journal of medical education · 2023
   Article
2. Molecular Mechanism Pathways of Natural Compounds for the Treatment of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
   Review
3. A four-part guide to lung immunology: Invasion, inflammation, immunity, and intervention.Frontiers in immunology · 2023
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Occupation and SARS-CoV-2 infection risk among workers during the first pandemic wave in Germany: potential for bias.2022

Authors and funding

32 authors at 18 institutions in 4 countries.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.