Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38496588›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024

SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence by industry, workplace characteristics, and workplace infection prevention and control measures, North Carolina, 2021 to 2022.

Carolyn Gigot, Nora Pisanic, Kristoffer Spicer, Meghan F Davis, Kate Kruczynski, Magdielis Gregory Rivera, Kirsten Koehler, D J Hall, Devon J Hall, Christopher D Heaney

Open access · greenAbstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Carolyn GigotDepartment of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0778-5539
Nora PisanicDepartment of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0042-9232
Kristoffer SpicerDepartment of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Meghan F DavisDepartment of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Kate KruczynskiDepartment of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Magdielis Gregory RiveraDepartment of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Kirsten KoehlerDepartment of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
D J HallRural Empowerment Association for Community Help, Warsaw, North Carolina, USA.
Devon J HallRural Empowerment Association for Community Help, Warsaw, North Carolina, USA.
Christopher D HeaneyDepartment of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3211-8495
Johns Hopkins University · USBloomberg (United States) · USEmpowerment Program · US

Funding

ECHODAC (Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes Data Analysis Center)U24OD023382 · OD · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Diane J Catellier, LISA P JACOBSON · 2016 to 2026
$148.4M
Targeted Research Training CoreT42OH008428 · OH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI RAMACHANDRAN, GURUMURTHY · 2005 to 2025
$31.1M
Johns Hopkins P.O.E. Total Worker Health Center in Mental Health (POE Center)U19OH012297 · OH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DAVIS, MEGHAN F., FALLIN, M DANIELE · 2021 to 2025
$7.0M
Antimicrobial resistant E. coli before and after California Senate bill 27 (ARES): a natural experimentR01AI130066 · NIAID · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI TARTOF, SARA · 2017 to 2021
$3.8M
Arsenic and immune response to influenza vaccination in pregnant women and newbornsR01ES026973 · NIEHS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI HEANEY, CHRISTOPHER D, LABRIQUE, ALAIN BERNARD · 2017 to 2021
$3.6M
Multiplex oral fluid antibody assay for arbovirus diagnosis, surveillance and preventionR21AI139784 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI COLLINS, MATTHEW, HEANEY, CHRISTOPHER D · 2018 to 2019
$459k
Development of a point of care lateral flow diagnostic to test for acute and past hepatitis E (HEV) in salivaR43AI141265 · NIAID · NANOCOMPOSIX, INC. · PI BALDWIN, RICHARD KIMO, PISANIC, NORA · 2018 to 2018
$225k
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI130066NIAID NIH HHS R21 AI139784NIAID NIH HHS R43 AI141265NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES026973NIH HHS U24 OD023382NIOSH CDC HHS T42 OH008428NIOSH CDC HHS U19 OH012297
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected workers in certain industries and occupations, and the workplace can be a high risk setting for SARS-CoV-2 transmission. In this study, we measured SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence and identified work-related risk factors in a population primarily working at industrial livestock operations. Methods: We used a multiplex salivary SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody assay to determine infection-induced antibody prevalence among 236 adult (≥18 years) North Carolina residents between February 2021 and August 2022. We used the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Industry and Occupation Computerized Coding System (NIOCCS) to classify employed participants' industry and compared infection-induced IgG prevalence by participant industry and with the North Carolina general population. We also combined antibody results with reported SARS-CoV-2 molecular test positivity and vaccination history to identify evidence of prior infection. We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios of prior infection by potential work-related risk factors, adjusting for industry and date. Results: Most participants (55%) were infection-induced IgG positive, including 71% of animal slaughtering and processing industry workers, which is 1.5 to 4.3 times higher compared to the North Carolina general population, as well as higher than molecularly-confirmed cases and the only other serology study we identified of animal slaughtering and processing workers. Considering questionnaire results in addition to antibodies, the proportion of participants with evidence of prior infection increased slightly, to 61%, including 75% of animal slaughtering and processing workers. Participants with more than 1000 compared to 10 or fewer coworkers at their jobsite had higher odds of prior infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0 to 21.0). Conclusions: This study contributes evidence of the severe and disproportionate impacts of COVID-19 on animal processing and essential workers and workers in large congregate settings. We also demonstrate the utility of combining non-invasive biomarker and questionnaire data for the study of workplace exposures.

Indexed as

animal slaughtering and processingCOVID-19industrial livestock operationsinfection prevention and controlSARS-CoV-2seroprevalence

Identifiers

PMID38496588
PMCPMC10942491
OpenAlexW4392604145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.