ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences
Workplace Safety and Screening of Healthcare Workers for SARS-CoV-2 at a Tertiary Care Hospital in the Northern Emirates of United Arab Emirates.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first reported in December 2019 in Wuhan, People's Republic of China, and caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), As the virus took hold in the world, health experts paced efforts to solve the unknown nature of this threat. Methodology: We studied the clinical characteristics, laboratory biomarkers of healthcare workers in the single center, analytical cross-sectional study conducted in tertiary care hospital of the UAE. Sample size of 600 HCWs were screened for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assay using Seegene Allplex and Andis FAST SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR detection kits for a period of 6 months. Findings: All the health care workers (HCWs) were vaccinated for the SARS-CoV-2. Out of these, 240 HCWs were reported to be positive. rRT-PCR with a Ct value of <38 was taken as positive >38. The laboratory investigations of the positive cases were collected and analysed further. A comparison of the laboratory tests was made between (I) COVID severe (Ct < 25) and nonsevere (Ct > 25) groups and (II) frontline workers and non-frontline workers. Besides finding short-term and sudden relief, investigators directed their efforts to provide a long-term solution for an ensuing pandemic that influenced all areas of life in unprecedented ways. Conclusion: Awareness among healthcare workers and further long-term studies focusing on their mental health the overall wellness and especially the psychological burden on doctors have received heightened awareness in media and research publications. This information can assist in developing surveillance and infection and control policies and preparedness for future COVID epidemics in similar scenarios in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.