Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36564109›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 transmission in close contacts of adults at high risk of infection due to occupation: results from the contact tracing strategy of the CoVIDA epidemiological surveillance study in Bogotá, Colombia, in 2020-2021.

Andrea Ramírez Varela, Sandra Contreras-Arrieta, Guillermo Tamayo-Cabeza, Leonardo Salas Zapata, Yuldor Caballero-Díaz, Luis Jorge Hernández Florez, Andrés Patiño Benavidez, Rachid Laajaj, Fernando De la Hoz, Giancarlo Buitrago Gutierrez and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Andrea Ramírez VarelaSchool of Medicine, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia an-rami2@uniandes.edu.co.
Sandra Contreras-ArrietaSchool of Medicine, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
Guillermo Tamayo-CabezaSchool of Medicine, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
Leonardo Salas ZapataObservatorio de Salud, Secretaría Distrital de Salud de Bogotá, Bogotá D.C, Colombia.
Yuldor Caballero-DíazSchool of Medicine, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
Luis Jorge Hernández FlorezSchool of Medicine, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
Andrés Patiño BenavidezEpidemiología y Salud Pública, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.
Rachid LaajajDepartment of Economics, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá DC, Colombia.
Fernando De la HozDepartamento de Salud Pública, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá DC, Colombia.
Giancarlo Buitrago GutierrezClinical Research Institute, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá DC, Colombia.
Silvia RestrepoDepartment of Food and Chemical Engineering, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
Eduardo BehrentzVicerrectoría Administrativa y Financiera, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá DC, Colombia.
CoVIDA working group
Universidad de Los Andes · COUniversidad Nacional de Colombia · COSecretaría de Salud de Bogotá · CO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo estimate the risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 transmission in close contacts of adults at high risk of infection due to occupation, participants of the CoVIDA study, in Bogotá D.C., Colombia.

settingThe CoVIDA study was the largest COVID-19 intensified sentinel epidemiological surveillance study in Colombia thus far, performing over 60 000 RT-PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection. The study implemented a contact tracing strategy (via telephone call) to support traditional surveillance actions performed by the local health authority.

participantsClose contacts of participants from the CoVIDA study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: SARS-CoV-2 testing results were obtained (RT-PCR with CoVIDA or self-reported results). The secondary attack rate (SAR) was calculated using contacts and primary cases features.

resultsThe CoVIDA study performed 1257 contact tracing procedures on primary cases. A total of 5551 close contacts were identified and 1050 secondary cases (21.1%) were found. The highest SAR was found in close contacts: (1) who were spouses (SAR=32.7%; 95% CI 29.1% to 36.4%), (2) of informally employed or unemployed primary cases (SAR=29.1%; 95% CI 25.5% to 32.8%), (3) of symptomatic primary cases (SAR of 25.9%; 95% CI 24.0% to 27.9%) and (4) living in households with more than three people (SAR=22.2%; 95% CI 20.7% to 23.8%). The spouses (OR 3.85; 95% CI 2.60 to 5.70), relatives (OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.33 to 2.70) and close contacts of a symptomatic primary case (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.24 to 1.77) had an increased risk of being secondary cases compared with non-relatives and close contacts of an asymptomatic index case, respectively.

conclusionsContact tracing strategies must focus on households with socioeconomic vulnerabilities to guarantee isolation and testing to stop the spread of the disease.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2AdultColombiaContact TracingCOVID-19 TestingHumansOccupationsRisk FactorsCOVID-19EPIDEMIOLOGYPUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID36564109
PMCPMC9791111
OpenAlexW4312181881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.