ArticleHealth science reports2025
Biosafety Management Practices Among Clinical Laboratory Professionals in Debre Berhan Town Governmental Hospitals, Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 and Aims: Clinical laboratories play a vital role in modern healthcare, where laboratory test results significantly influence medical decisions. However, laboratory professionals are often exposed to hazardous biological materials, underscoring the importance of biosafety management. This study aimed to assess biosafety practices among clinical laboratory professionals in Debre Berhan town, Ethiopia. Methods: A cross-sectional study involving 81 participants was conducted using a standard questionnaire covering work habits, protective barriers, safety equipment, and biosafety policy perception. Descriptive data was summarized using a table and graph. Logistic regression was employed to determine factors affecting adherence to biosafety protocols. Statistically significant value was identified using Results: The results revealed high compliance with essential work habits, such as the use of mechanical pipettes 77 (95.1%) and proper handwashing after handling biohazardous material 78 (96.3%) and after removing gloves 80 (98.8%). However, adherence to the use of protective barriers 50 (61.7%), biosafety training 15 (18.5%), and emergency preparedness 28 (34.6%) were notably low. Only 35 (43.2%) of participants received appropriate immunizations, and access to biosafety equipment like biological safety cabinets was limited 15 (18.5%). Experience and training were significant predictors of biosafety compliance, highlighting the need for continuous education and institutional support. Conclusion: The findings underscore the importance of enhancing training programs, improving access to safety equipment, and ensuring the consistent application of biosafety protocols to protect laboratory personnel from hazardous biological materials and maintain public health.
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.