Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1111/irv.12745 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1111/irv.12745 32246890!7298295!32246890     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Influenza+Other+Respir+Viruses 2020 ; 14 (4): 365-373 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=32246890|t=2020. Medical masks vs N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials |pdf=|usr=}}{{32246890}} gab.com Text Medical masks vs N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials JO: Influenza Other Respir Viruses http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32246890 #FOAvip BACKGROUND: Respiratory protective devices are critical in protecting against infection in healthcare workers at high risk of novel 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19); however, recommendations are conflicting and epidemiological data on their relative effectiveness against COVID-19 are limited. PURPOSE: To compare medical masks to N95 respirators in preventing laboratory-confirmed viral infection and respiratory illness including coronavirus specifically in healthcare workers. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL from January 1, 2014, to March 9, 2020. Update of published search conducted from January 1, 1990, to December 9, 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the protective effect of medical masks to N95 respirators in healthcare workers. DATA EXTRACTION: Reviewer pair independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Four RCTs were meta-analyzed adjusting for clustering. Compared with N95 respirators; the use of medical masks did not increase laboratory-confirmed viral (including coronaviruses) respiratory infection (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.90-1.25; I(2) = 0%; low certainty in the evidence) or clinical respiratory illness (OR 1.49; 95% CI: 0.98-2.28; I(2) = 78%; very low certainty in the evidence). Only one trial evaluated coronaviruses separately and found no difference between the two groups (P = .49). LIMITATIONS: Indirectness and imprecision of available evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Low certainty evidence suggests that medical masks and N95 respirators offer similar protection against viral respiratory infection including coronavirus in healthcare workers during non-aerosol-generating care. Preservation of N95 respirators for high-risk, aerosol-generating procedures in this pandemic should be considered when in short supply. Twit Text FOAVip Medical masks vs N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials ????Influenza Other Respir Viruses http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32246890 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32246890 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|32246890}}</ref> Medical masks vs N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials #MMPMID32246890 Bartoszko JJ; Farooqi MAM; Alhazzani W; Loeb M Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2020[Jul]; 14 (4): 365-373 PMID32246890show ga BACKGROUND: Respiratory protective devices are critical in protecting against infection in healthcare workers at high risk of novel 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19); however, recommendations are conflicting and epidemiological data on their relative effectiveness against COVID-19 are limited. PURPOSE: To compare medical masks to N95 respirators in preventing laboratory-confirmed viral infection and respiratory illness including coronavirus specifically in healthcare workers. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL from January 1, 2014, to March 9, 2020. Update of published search conducted from January 1, 1990, to December 9, 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the protective effect of medical masks to N95 respirators in healthcare workers. DATA EXTRACTION: Reviewer pair independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Four RCTs were meta-analyzed adjusting for clustering. Compared with N95 respirators; the use of medical masks did not increase laboratory-confirmed viral (including coronaviruses) respiratory infection (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.90-1.25; I(2) = 0%; low certainty in the evidence) or clinical respiratory illness (OR 1.49; 95% CI: 0.98-2.28; I(2) = 78%; very low certainty in the evidence). Only one trial evaluated coronaviruses separately and found no difference between the two groups (P = .49). LIMITATIONS: Indirectness and imprecision of available evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Low certainty evidence suggests that medical masks and N95 respirators offer similar protection against viral respiratory infection including coronavirus in healthcare workers during non-aerosol-generating care. Preservation of N95 respirators for high-risk, aerosol-generating procedures in this pandemic should be considered when in short supply. |COVID-19[MESH] |Coronavirus Infections/*prevention & control[MESH] |Health Personnel[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Infection Control/methods[MESH] |Masks/*standards[MESH] |Occupational Exposure/*prevention & control[MESH] |Pandemics/*prevention & control[MESH] |Pneumonia, Viral/*prevention & control[MESH] |Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic[MESH] |Respiratory Protective Devices/standards/supply & distribution[MESH] |Respiratory Tract Infections/*prevention & control/virology[MESH]Medical masks vs N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 in healthcare(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing