ArticleRevista espanola de salud publica2023
[Factors associated with the duration of SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare professionals at a second-level public hospital in the Community of Madrid (Spain) during the sixth wave.]
Article in Revista espanola de salud publica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- COVID-19 Infection Risk Among Vulnerable Healthcare Workers: The Protective Role of Pre-Pandemic Recognition.Clinics and practice · 2026Article
- Vaccination and Antiviral Treatment Reduce the Time to Negative SARS-CoV-2 Swab: A Real-Life Study.Viruses · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe incidence of COVID-19 infections among health professionals during the sixth wave has suffered an exponential increase, mainly due to the rapid community transmission caused by the Omicron variant. The main objective of the study was to evaluate the time to negativization in COVID-positive health professionals during the sixth wave, according to the PDIA result; and secondarily, to evaluate the possible influence of other factors (previous infection, vaccination, sex, age, job position) on the time to get negative status.
methodsA descriptive, longitudinal, observational and retrospective study was carried out at Infanta Sofía University Hospital (Madrid, Spain). Made from the registry of the Occupational Risk Prevention Service of suspected or confirmed cases of SARS-COV-2 infection in health professionals, during the period between November 1, 2021 and February 28, 2022. Bivariate comparisons were made using Mann Whitney, Kruskal Wallis or Chi-square test (or exact test) according to variables. Subsequently, logistic regression (explanatory model) was performed.
resultsThe cumulative incidence of SARS-COV-2 infection in health professionals was 23.07%. The mean time to become negative was 9.94 days. Only the history of previous SARS-COV-2 infection had a statistically significant influence on the time to negativization of PDIA. The variables vaccination, sex and age had no effect on the time to negativization of PDIA.
conclusionsProfessionals with a history of COVID-19 infection present lower times of negativization than those who had not have the disease. The results of our study confirm the immune escape of the vaccine against COVID-19, since more than 95% of those infected had received a complete vaccination schedule.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36794790PMC10540892W4321002084What 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.