↓ Skip to main content

The prevalence of hepatitis C among healthcare workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Occupational and environmental medicine, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
17 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The prevalence of hepatitis C among healthcare workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Occupational and environmental medicine, October 2015
DOI 10.1136/oemed-2015-102879
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudia Westermann, Claudia Peters, Birgitte Lisiak, Monica Lamberti, Albert Nienhaus, Melanie Harling

Abstract

The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of viral hepatitis C (HCV) infection among healthcare workers (HCWs) compared to the general population. A systematic search for the years 1989-2014 was conducted in the Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases. Studies on hepatitis C in HCWs were included if they incorporated either a control group or reference data for the general population. The study quality was classified as high, moderate or low. Pooled effect estimates were calculated to determine the odds of occupational infection. Heterogeneity between studies was analysed using the χ(2) test (p<0.10) and quantified using the I(2) test. 57 studies met our criteria for inclusion and 44 were included in the meta-analysis. Analysis of high and moderate quality studies showed a significantly increased OR for HCV infection in HCWs relative to control populations, with a value of 1.6 (95% CI 1.03 to 2.42). Stratification by study region gave an OR of 2.1 in low prevalence countries; while stratification by occupational groups gave an increased prevalence for medical (OR 2.2) and for laboratory staff (OR 2.2). The OR for professionals at high risk of blood contact was 2.7. The pooled analysis indicates that the prevalence of infection is significantly higher in HCWs than in the general population. The highest prevalence was observed among medical and laboratory staff. Prospective studies that focus on HCW-specific activity and personal risk factors for HCV infection are needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 104 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 21%
Student > Postgraduate 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 33 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 34 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,583,738
of 25,653,515 outputs
Outputs from Occupational and environmental medicine
#351
of 4,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,149
of 290,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Occupational and environmental medicine
#9
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,653,515 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,883 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 290,276 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.