ArticleWorld journal of virology2025
Risk of COVID-19 infection among frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in World journal of virology, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the initial stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, healthcare workers (HCWs) who were immunologically naive to COVID-19, were exposed to a highly transmissible virus.
aimTo compare infection risk among HCWs in high-risk (HR) and low-risk (LR) areas.
methodsData on reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction confirmed clinical infection and samples for nucleocapsid, and spike protein antibodies were collected at five time-points (T1 to T5) from HCWs in the emergency department and intensive care unit (HR group) and pre-clinical and para-clinical areas (LR). For the sero-study, only participants who provided at least one baseline sample and one during the second wave (T4 or T5) were analysed. Since Covishield
resultsOverall, by T5, clinical infection rate was similar in the HR (120/366, 32.8%) and LR (22/82, 26.8%) groups (
conclusionBefore vaccination, HCWs in HR areas had a higher risk of infection. Seroprevalence studies suggest that sub-clinical infection was not uncommon.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.