ArticleInternational journal of microbiology2026
Genomic and Phylogenetic Dissection of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission Networks in Healthcare Workers.
Article in International journal of microbiology, 2026. 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.
- Genomic and Phylogenetic Dissection of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission Networks in Healthcare Workers.International journal of microbiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding how SARS-CoV-2 circulates among healthcare workers (HCWs) is critical for maintaining safe hospitals and protecting communities. We retrospectively examined 93 archived nasopharyngeal swabs collected from SARS-CoV-2 positive HCWs and their close contacts at a Turkish university hospital between March 2020 and November 2021. Viral RNA was confirmed by RT-PCR and sequenced with the QIAseq DIRECT SARS-CoV-2 workflow on an Illumina platform; genomes were aligned to the Wuhan-H1 reference and analyzed with maximum-likelihood phylogenetics. Sixty-three individuals formed 20 epidemiologically defined clusters (40 HCWs, 23 contacts; mean age ≈ 34 years), most experiencing only mild or moderate illness. Sequencing quality improved as RT-PCR cycle threshold values fell, and nearly 98% of each genome was covered at 10 × depth. Fourteen viral lineages were detected, yet samples from the same cluster differed by no more than two single-nucleotide changes, indicating recent person-to-person spread. Phylogenetic reconstruction suggested single-source introduction in three-quarters of clusters, with the remainder reflecting multiple introductions. Observational data linked transmission events to inconsistent use of personal protective equipment and inadequate physical distancing in break rooms, shared offices, and household settings. By combining genomic and field evidence, this study clarifies the paths by which SARS-CoV-2 moved through a healthcare workforce, highlights the value of whole-genome sequencing for outbreak resolution, and reinforces the continuing need for rigorous infection-control practices even when overall case severity appears low to prevent future clusters and maintain healthcare resilience.
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.