Back

Synthesis and new evidence from the PROTECT UK National Core Study: Determining occupational risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 mortality

Rhodes, S.; Beale, S.; Cherrie, M.; Mueller, W.; Holland, F.; Matz, M.; Basinas, I.; Wilkinson, J. D.; Gittins, M.; Farrell, B.; Hayward, A.; Pearce, N.; van Tongeren, M.

2023-06-30 occupational and environmental health
10.1101/2023.06.30.23292079 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionThe PROTECT National Core Study was funded by the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) to investigate routes of transmission for SARS-CoV-2 and variation between settings. MethodsA workshop was organised in Oct 2022.We brought together evidence from five published epidemiological studies that compared risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 mortality by occupation or sector funded by PROTECT relating to three non-overlapping data sets, plus additional unpublished analyses relating to the Omicron period. We extracted descriptive study level data and model results. We investigated risk across four pandemic waves using forest plots for key occupational groups by time-period. ResultsResults were largely consistent across different studies with different expected biases. Healthcare and social care sectors saw elevated risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 mortality early in the pandemic, but thereafter this declined and varied by specific occupational subgroup. The education sector saw sustained elevated risks of infection after the initial lockdown period with little evidence of elevated mortality. ConclusionsIncreased in risk of infection and mortality were consistently observed for occupations in high risk sectors particularly during the early stage of the pandemic. The education sector showed a different pattern compared to the other high risk sectors, as relative risk of infections remained high in the later phased of the pandemic, although no increased in COVID-19 mortality (compared to low-risk occupations) was observed in this sector in any point during the pandemic.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.4%
2
The Lancet Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.6%
3
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.7%
50% of probability mass above
4
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.3%
5
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 2%
8.4%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.6%
7
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
8
Nature
575 papers in training set
Top 9%
2.1%
9
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
10
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.5%
11
Thorax
32 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 62%
1.5%
13
Systematic Reviews
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
14
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
15
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
16
Emergency Medicine Journal
20 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
17
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
18
Epidemiology and Infection
84 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
19
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
20
The Lancet Regional Health - Europe
32 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
21
The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%