Occupational Infections Among Workers in Europe: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Workers may be exposed to different infectious agents, putting them at risk of developing occupational diseases. This can occur in many ways, through deliberate use of specific microorganisms or through potential exposure from close contact with biological material. Infection prevention and control measures against biohazards can reduce the risk of infection among workers. During the last few decades, an increasing proportion of workers in Europe have been exposed to infectious biological agents in their workplace. Knowledge gaps on this topic in Europe have limited our understanding of the overall phenomenon in occupational settings. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to understand the extent and type of evidence on the epidemiology of occupational or work-related infections caused by bacterial, viral, fungal, and parasitical agents in European countries, the factors affecting their occurrence among workers, and the burden of disease among workers due to occupational risk. METHODS: The review will be conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. This review will consider studies that include data on the epidemiology of occupational infections, risk factors and determinants, and burden of disease among workers employed in specific occupational sectors in European countries in the period 2010-2023. The search will include MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Independent reviewers (including GD, SC, AR, PD, and SM) will screen the titles, abstracts, and full texts of the selected studies. Data extraction will be performed using a tool developed by the researchers. The data will be mapped and analyzed according to the type of extracted data. RESULTS: The literature search through different scientific databases started in April 2024 and is expected to be completed by December 2024. The findings will be extracted using an ad hoc data extraction tool, and relevant results will be presented in narrative and tabular form. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review aims to provide rigorous evidence to fill the knowledge gap in the epidemiology of occupational or work-related infections in European countries, the factors affecting their occurrence, and the burden of disease in different professional settings. Such findings could improve the understanding of this complex occupational phenomenon in the European context, enabling more accurate and up-to-date surveillance of infections incurred in the workplace. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/59606.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.075 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.087 | 0.014 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".