2023
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11091495
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Vaccinating Welders against Pneumococcus: Evidence from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Matteo Riccò,
Pietro Ferraro,
Salvatore Zaffina
et al.

Abstract: Workers occupationally exposed to welding dusts and fumes have been suspected to be at increased risk of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD). Since the 2010s, the United Kingdom Department of Health and the German Ständige Impfkommission (STIKO) actively recommend welders undergo immunization with the 23-valent polysaccharide (PPV23) pneumococcal vaccine, but this recommendation has not been extensively shared by international health authorities. The present meta-analysis was therefore designed to collect avai… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 63 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, even though nearly all studies extensively reported how the samples were recruited, the actual representativity of the assessed occupational groups from the targeted areas remains unclear. This issue is particularly significant when dealing with estimates from agricultural settings and/or low-income countries, where occupational and residential environments are hardly dichotomized [ 93 , 94 ], and job descriptions could fail to appreciate the actual exposures [ 93 , 94 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 ]. As participants can perform several tasks at the same time (e.g., agricultural workers that also care for animals on a daily basis, possibly performing their slaughtering), corresponding sources of exposure are also highly overlapped, suggesting a quite cautious appraisal of the eventual estimates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, even though nearly all studies extensively reported how the samples were recruited, the actual representativity of the assessed occupational groups from the targeted areas remains unclear. This issue is particularly significant when dealing with estimates from agricultural settings and/or low-income countries, where occupational and residential environments are hardly dichotomized [ 93 , 94 ], and job descriptions could fail to appreciate the actual exposures [ 93 , 94 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 ]. As participants can perform several tasks at the same time (e.g., agricultural workers that also care for animals on a daily basis, possibly performing their slaughtering), corresponding sources of exposure are also highly overlapped, suggesting a quite cautious appraisal of the eventual estimates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%