Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36197844›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

The Potential Role of an Adjunctive Real-Time Locating System in Preventing Secondary Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in a Hospital Environment: Retrospective Case-Control Study.

Min Hyung Kim, Un Hyoung Ryu, Seok-Jae Heo, Yong Chan Kim, Yoon Soo Park

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Min Hyung KimDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin-si, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0250-212X
Un Hyoung RyuDivision of Planning and Management, Office of Medical Information Technology, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin-si, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8356-106X
Seok-Jae HeoDivision of Biostatistics, Department of Biomedical Systems Informatics, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8764-7995
Yong Chan KimDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin-si, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5081-7906
Yoon Soo ParkDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin-si, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-4640-9525

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has been an increasing demand for new technologies regarding infection control in hospital settings to reduce the burden of contact tracing.

objectiveThis study aimed to compare the validity of a real-time locating system (RTLS) with that of the conventional contact tracing method for identifying high-risk contact cases associated with the secondary transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

methodsA retrospective case-control study involving in-hospital contact cases of confirmed COVID-19 patients, who were diagnosed from January 23 to March 25, 2022, was conducted at a university hospital in South Korea. Contact cases were identified using either the conventional method or the RTLS. The primary endpoint of this study was secondary transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among contact cases. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis comparing test positive and versus negative contact cases were performed.

resultsOverall, 509 and 653 cases were confirmed by the conventional method and the RTLS, respectively. Only 74 contact cases were identified by both methods, which could be attributed to the limitations of each method. Sensitivity was higher for the RTLS tracing method (653/1088, 60.0%) than the conventional tracing method (509/1088, 46.8%) considering all contact cases identified by both methods. The secondary transmission rate in the RTLS model was 8.1%, while that in the conventional model was 5.3%. The multivariable logistic regression model revealed that the RTLS was more capable of detecting secondary transmission than the conventional method (adjusted odds ratio 6.15, 95% CI 1.92-28.69; P=.007).

conclusionsThis study showed that the RTLS is beneficial when used as an adjunctive approach to the conventional method for contact tracing associated with secondary transmission. However, the RTLS cannot completely replace traditional contact tracing.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2Case-Control StudiesContact TracingHospitalsHumansRetrospective Studiescontact tracingCOVID-19real-time locating systemSARS-CoV-2secondary transmission

Identifiers

PMID36197844
PMCPMC9580994

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.