Back

Face masks to control the source of respiratory infections: A systematic review of the scientific literature before and after COVID-19

Prasad, V.; Brown, E. M.; Haslam, A.

2023-10-11 infectious diseases
10.1101/2023.10.05.23296616 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveTo examine the scientific literature on mask-use as source control to protect others from respiratory infections before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. DesignSystematic review. MethodsWe examined primary research on mask usage as a means of source control to protect others by reducing the spread of respiratory diseases and contrasted the literature published before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic with that published afterward. Articles were obtained through a search of PubMed and a review of article references. March 1, 2020 was selected as the cutoff date to distinguish between the pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 periods. Results195 articles met our inclusion criteria. The sample included 55 articles on source control published before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, and 140 articles published after the pandemic began, representing a 154.5% increase. The percentage of randomized control trials (RCT) and cluster RCTs declined by 94.9% (p<0.001), representing only 1.4% of the post-pandemic literature. The percentage of studies conducted on human subjects declined by 48.8% (p<0.001), and the percentage of studies in healthcare facilities declined by 64.5% (p=0.019). One in 5 post-pandemic studies (21.4%) were conducted in "real world" settings; 1 in 10 post-pandemic studies (10.0%) were done with computer modeling. Study authors were significantly more supportive of masks as source control in the post-pandemic literature. ConclusionsThe quality of evidence in the published literature on masks as source control is lower after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, with notable shifts in methodologies, research subjects, setting, and author tone.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.