Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22379483›Full record

ArticleThe Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale2011

Heterogeneity of rotavirus testing and admitting practices for gastroenteritis among 12 tertiary care pediatric hospitals: Implications for surveillance.

Julie A Bettinger, Kathryn Wills, Nicole Le Saux, David W Scheifele, Scott A Halperin, Wendy Vaudry

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Recommendation of rotavirus vaccination and herd effect: a budget impact analysis based on German health insurance data.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2015
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. New vaccines - which ones should we choose?The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2013
    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

6 authors.

Julie A BettingerVaccine Evaluation Centre, BC Children's Hospital and the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia;
Kathryn Wills
Nicole Le Saux
David W Scheifele
Scott A Halperin
Wendy Vaudry

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Canadian Immunization Monitoring Program, ACTive (IMPACT) surveillance for rotavirus relies on monitoring hospital admissions. Because a diagnosis of rotavirus is not necessary for treatment purposes, and rotavirus is not a reportable disease, wide variation may exist in the admitting and testing practices for this disease. From 2005 to 2007, the number of rotavirus admissions differed significantly among IMPACT centres, and this variation could not be explained by population differences alone. Understanding this variation is important when interpreting surveillance data and estimating the cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination programs.

methodsKey informant interviews were conducted with pediatric infectious disease physicians and IMPACT nurse monitors involved with rotavirus surveillance to obtain in-depth information about rotavirus testing and admitting practices at each of the 12 IMPACT centres.

resultsA total of 18 of 24 interviews were completed, with at least one interview conducted with physicians and/or nurses at each centre. Four major differences were identified among the centres: case-identification methods, admission definitions, admission criteria and testing criteria. The criteria for admitting and testing patients as well as which patients were defined as admissions had the greatest influence on case totals. DISCUSSION: The present study found that differences in admitting and testing practices may contribute to significant differences in rotavirus admission totals. Given these differences, caution should be used when using local case estimates for cost-effectiveness analyses and immunization program decisions. The present study illustrates that understanding the factors that influence the identification of a disease is important when interpreting and applying surveillance data.

Indexed as

Case identificationDisease burdenRotavirusSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID22379483
PMCPMC3076150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.