Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18958279›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2008

A simple scoring system to differentiate between relapse and re-infection in patients with recurrent melioidosis.

Direk Limmathurotsakul, Wipada Chaowagul, Narisara Chantratita, Vanaporn Wuthiekanun, Mayurachat Biaklang, Sarinna Tumapa, Nicholas J White, Nicholas P J Day, Sharon J Peacock

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Marmosets as models of infectious diseases.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Human Melioidosis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2020
    Review
  12. The Impact of Age and Sex on Mouse Models of Melioidosis.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Melioidosis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2018
    Review
  16. Role of Burkholderia pseudomallei biofilm formation and lipopolysaccharide in relapse of melioidosis.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2014
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Direk LimmathurotsakulMahidol-Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. direk@tropmedres.ac
Wipada Chaowagul
Narisara Chantratita
Vanaporn Wuthiekanun
Mayurachat Biaklang
Sarinna Tumapa
Nicholas J White
Nicholas P J Day
Sharon J Peacock
Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit · THMahidol University · THUniversity of Oxford · GBSappasithiprasong Hospital · TH

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMelioidosis is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in East Asia. Recurrent melioidosis occurs in around 10% of patients following treatment either because of relapse with the same strain or re-infection with a new strain of Burkholderia pseudomallei. Distinguishing between the two is important but requires bacterial genotyping. The aim of this study was to develop a simple scoring system to distinguish re-infection from relapse.

methodsIn a prospective study of 2,804 consecutive adult patients with melioidosis presenting to Sappasithiprasong Hospital, NE Thailand, between 1986 and 2005, there were 141 patients with recurrent melioidosis with paired strains available for genotyping. Of these, 92 patients had relapse and 49 patients had re-infection. Variables associated with relapse or re-infection were identified by multivariable logistic regression and used to develop a predictive model. Performance of the scoring system was quantified with respect to discrimination (area under receiver operating characteristic curves, AUC) and categorization (graphically). Bootstrap resampling was used to internally validate the predictors and adjust for over-optimism.

findingsDuration of oral antimicrobial treatment, interval between the primary episode and recurrence, season, and renal function at recurrence were independent predictors of relapse or re-infection. A score of < 5 correctly identified relapse in 76 of 89 patients (85%), whereas a score > or = 5 correctly identified re-infection in 36 of 52 patients (69%). The scoring index had good discriminative power, with a bootstrap bias-corrected AUC of 0.80 (95%CI: 0.73-0.87).

conclusionsA simple scoring index to predict the cause of recurrent melioidosis has been developed to provide important bedside information where rapid bacterial genotyping is unavailable.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Techniques and ProceduresAdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsBurkholderia pseudomalleiFemaleHumansMaleMelioidosisMicrobial Sensitivity TestsProspective StudiesRecurrenceThailandYoung AdultAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID18958279
PMCPMC2570249
OpenAlexW2089002865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.