SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence, vaccination, and hesitancy in agricultural workers in Guatemala

  1. Diva M. Calvimontes
  2. Lyndsay Krisher
  3. Alex Cruz-Aguilar
  4. Daniel Pilloni-Alessio
  5. Luis E. Crisostomo-Cal
  6. Edgar A. Castañeda-Sosa
  7. Jaime Butler-Dawson
  8. Daniel Olson
  9. Lee S. Newman
  10. Edwin J. Asturias

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

During the COVID-19 pandemic, serological tests to screen populations have provided better estimates of the cumulative incidence of infection. This study evaluated the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in agricultural workers in rural Guatemala, their COVID-19 vaccine uptake and vaccination attitudes.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was undertaken from August to November of 2021, in agricultural workers at a sugar plantation in Guatemala. A questionnaire was used to collect demographic, previous COVID-19 infection, vaccination, and attitudes toward vaccination. Serological testing was performed to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG.

Results

Of the 4,343 study participants, 1,279 (29.4%) were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 compared to 2.3% who reported previous COVID-19 infection. COVID-19 vaccine coverage was 85% for the first dose and 21.9% for second dose. Vaccine refusal was 0.6%, and 13.9% expressed some degree of vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitant workers or those refusing were less likely to have had the COVID-19 vaccine. Main reasons to get the vaccine were to protect family, coworkers, and community.

Conclusion

Agricultural workers in countries like Guatemala have suffered a high incidence of asymptomatic and undetected SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most have received the COVID-19 vaccine, but there are moderate degrees of vaccine hesitancy that require better public health information to overcome it.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.02.22.22270907: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: This cross-sectional epidemiological study was approved by the National Ethics Committee of the Ministry of Public Health and Social Assistance of Guatemala and considered a priority for public health.
    Consent: All participants signed an informed consent.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    The STANDARD™ Q COVID-19 IgM/IgG Plus test is a rapid chromatographic immunoassay for the qualitative detection of specific antibodies (anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid(N) protein antibodies and anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike RBD antibodies) to SARS-CoV-2 and do not cross-react with the S-protein antibodies elicited by most vaccines.
    anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid(N) protein
    suggested: None
    anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike RBD
    suggested: None
    S-protein
    suggested: None

    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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    11,12 It is important to remark on some limitations of this study. First, the population surveyed does not represent other populations of agricultural and rural workers, and there is a selection bias towards young and healthy men, who were probably vaccinated given the recommendations provided by the employer before applying for a job. Second, this is a cross-sectional study, and most reports were based on self-reporting by workers which may have introduced recall bias. Despite this, the study provides valuable data for agricultural worker populations from middle-income countries that are considered essential for the economy and global food security.

    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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2022.02.22.22270907 on medRxiv