The prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic healthcare workers with intensive exposure to COVID-19
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The prevalence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers with intensive exposure to COVID-19 is unclear. In this study, we investigated the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in 797 asymptomatic healthcare workers with intensive exposure to COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China. Positive IgG was detected from 35 asymptomatic healthcare workers, and the prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic healthcare workers was 4.39% (35/797). None of them developed COVID-19 until May 15. 33 of them have performed at least one chest CT scan showing no viral pneumonia features, and 16 have finished at least one-time SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection with negative results. When contacting with the patients, 15 of them dressed with full personal protective equipment (PPE), and 16 worn N95 mask and gown. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first investigation reported that the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was 4.39% in asymptomatic healthcare workers with applied PPE in a high epidemic area, which may provide useful information of estimating asymptomatic infection rate in general population.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.28.20110767: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: This study was approved by medical ethics committee of Union Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology (0056). Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable The epidemiological information was collected by trained investigators from 797 asymptomatic healthcare workers (705 female) in Wuhan. 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 …SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.28.20110767: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: This study was approved by medical ethics committee of Union Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology (0056). Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable The epidemiological information was collected by trained investigators from 797 asymptomatic healthcare workers (705 female) in Wuhan. 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.
-
