Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37013634›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2023

Differential Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection by Occupation: Evidence from the Virus Watch prospective cohort study in England and Wales.

Sarah Beale, Susan Hoskins, Thomas Byrne, Wing Lam Erica Fong, Ellen Fragaszy, Cyril Geismar, Jana Kovar, Annalan M D Navaratnam, Vincent Nguyen, Parth Patel and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Occupation and COVID-19: Lessons From the Pandemic.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2024
    Article
  10. Occupation and SARS-CoV-2 in Europe: a review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Eyeglasses and risk of COVID-19 transmission-analysis of the Virus Watch Community Cohort study.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

16 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah BealeCentre for Public Health Data Science, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, NW1 2DA, UK. sarah.beale.19@ucl.ac.uk.
Susan HoskinsInstitute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB, UK.
Thomas ByrneCentre for Public Health Data Science, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Wing Lam Erica FongCentre for Public Health Data Science, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Ellen FragaszyCentre for Public Health Data Science, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Cyril GeismarCentre for Public Health Data Science, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Jana KovarInstitute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB, UK.
Annalan M D NavaratnamCentre for Public Health Data Science, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Vincent NguyenCentre for Public Health Data Science, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Parth PatelCentre for Public Health Data Science, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Alexei YavlinskyCentre for Public Health Data Science, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Anne M JohnsonInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, WC1N 1EH, UK.
Martie Van TongerenDivision of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9NT, UK.
Robert W AldridgeCentre for Public Health Data Science, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Andrew HaywardInstitute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB, UK.
Virus Watch Collaborative
Health Data Research UK · GBUniversity College London · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversity of London · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC 19070Medical Research Council MC_PC_19070Medical Research Council MR/V028375/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 206602
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWorkers across different occupations vary in their risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but the direct contribution of occupation to this relationship is unclear. This study aimed to investigate how infection risk differed across occupational groups in England and Wales up to April 2022, after adjustment for potential confounding and stratification by pandemic phase.

methodsData from 15,190 employed/self-employed participants in the Virus Watch prospective cohort study were used to generate risk ratios for virologically- or serologically-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection using robust Poisson regression, adjusting for socio-demographic and health-related factors and non-work public activities. We calculated attributable fractions (AF) amongst the exposed for belonging to each occupational group based on adjusted risk ratios (aRR).

resultsIncreased risk was seen in nurses (aRR = 1.44, 1.25-1.65; AF = 30%, 20-39%), doctors (aRR = 1.33, 1.08-1.65; AF = 25%, 7-39%), carers (1.45, 1.19-1.76; AF = 31%, 16-43%), primary school teachers (aRR = 1.67, 1.42- 1.96; AF = 40%, 30-49%), secondary school teachers (aRR = 1.48, 1.26-1.72; AF = 32%, 21-42%), and teaching support occupations (aRR = 1.42, 1.23-1.64; AF = 29%, 18-39%) compared to office-based professional occupations. Differential risk was apparent in the earlier phases (Feb 2020-May 2021) and attenuated later (June-October 2021) for most groups, although teachers and teaching support workers demonstrated persistently elevated risk across waves.

conclusionsOccupational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection risk vary over time and are robust to adjustment for socio-demographic, health-related, and non-workplace activity-related potential confounders. Direct investigation into workplace factors underlying elevated risk and how these change over time is needed to inform occupational health interventions.

Indexed as

InfectionOccupational healthPandemicSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID37013634
PMCPMC10068189
OpenAlexW4362522433

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.