MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387374372 · doi:10.1186/s41182-023-00547-3

Bacterial contamination of healthcare workers’ mobile phones in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4387374372 on OpenAlexaff
Demisu Zenbaba, Biniyam Sahiledengle, Girma Beressa, Fikreab Desta, Zinash Teferu, Fikadu Nugusu, Daniel Atlaw, Zerihun Shiferaw, Bereket Gezahegn, Ayele Mamo, Tesfaye Desalegn, Wogene Negash, Getahun Negash, Mohammedaman Mama, Eshetu Nigussie, Vijay Kumar Chattu

Bibliographic record

VenueTropical Medicine and Health · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careMeta-analysisEnvironmental healthPublic healthMedicineContaminationNursingPolitical scienceBiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mobile phones are potential reservoirs for pathogens and sources of healthcare-associated infections. More microbes can be found on a mobile phone than on a man's lavatory seat, the sole of a shoe, or a door handle. When examining patients, frequent handling of mobile phones can spread bacteria. Nevertheless, evidence of bacterial contamination of mobile phones used by healthcare workers in Africa was inconclusive. Thus, this meta-analysis and systematic review was conducted to estimate the pooled prevalence of bacterial contamination of mobile phones used by healthcare workers and the most frequent bacterial isolates in Africa. METHODS: We systematically retrieved relevant studies using PubMed/MEDLINE, POPLINE, HINARI, Science Direct, Cochrane Library databases, and Google Scholar from July 1, 2023 to August 08, 2023. We included observational studies that reported the prevalence of bacterial contamination of mobile phones among healthcare workers. The DerSimonian-random Laird's effect model was used to calculate effect estimates for the pooled prevalence of bacterial contamination in mobile phones and a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: = 97.9%, p value < 0.001). The most dominant type of bacteria isolated in this review was coagulase-negative staphylococci (CONS) which accounted for 44.0% of the pooled contamination rate of mobile phones used by healthcare workers, followed by Staphylococcus aureus (31.3%), and Escherichia coli (10.7%). CONCLUSIONS: In this review, the contamination of mobile phones used by HCWs with various bacterial isolates was shown to be considerable. The most prevalent bacteria isolates were coagulase-negative staphylococci, Staphylococcus aurous, and Escherichia coli. The prevalence of bacterial contamination in mobile phones varies by country and sub-region. Hence, healthcare planners and policymakers should establish norms to manage healthcare workers' hand hygiene and disinfection after using mobile phones.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.031
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.307
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.163 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTropical Medicine and HealthSame topicInfection Control in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207