Workplace exposures associated with COVID-19: evidence from a case-control study with multiple sampling periods in England, August–October 2020

  1. Iina Hiironen
  2. María Saavedra-Campos
  3. Jennifer Panitz
  4. Thomas Ma
  5. Olisaeloka Nsonwu
  6. Andre Charlett
  7. Gareth J. Hughes
  8. Isabel Oliver

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

We investigated risk factors associated with COVID-19 by conducting a retrospective, frequency-matched case-control study, with three sampling periods (August–October 2020). We compared cases completing routine contact tracing to asymptomatic population controls. Multivariable analyses estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for non-household community settings. Meta-analyses using random effects provided pooled odds ratios (pORs). Working in healthcare (pOR 2.87; aORs 2.72, 2.81, 3.08, for study periods 1–3 respectively), social care (pOR 4.15; aORs 2.46, 5.06, 5.41, for study periods 1–3 respectively) or hospitality (pOR 2.36; aORs 2.01, 2.54, 2.63, for study periods 1–3 respectively) were associated with increased odds of being a COVID-19 case. Additionally, working in bars, pubs and restaurants, warehouse settings, construction, educational settings were significantly associated. While definitively determining where transmission occurs is impossible, we provide evidence that in certain sectors, the impact of mitigation measures may only be partial and reinforcement of measures should be considered in these settings.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1017/s0950268822000863
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.21.20248161: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.12.21.20248161v1 on medRxiv