Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22668442›Full record

ReviewPaediatrics and international child health2012

Controversies in dengue pathogenesis.

Scott B Halstead

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Paediatrics and international child health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Enhancing epitope of PEDV spike protein.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Clinical profile and atypical manifestation ofJournal of family medicine and primary care · 2020
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Scott B HalsteadDengue Vaccine Initiative, International Vaccine Institute, Seoul, Korea. halsteads@erols.com
International Vaccine Institute · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research into the pathogenesis of dengue fever has exploded over the last half-century, with issues that were considered simple becoming more complex as additional data are found. This has led to the development of a number of controversies that are being studied across the globe and debated in the literature. In this paper, the following six controversies are analysed and, where possible, resolved: the 1997 World Health Organization (WHO) case definition of dengue haemorrhagic fever (DHF) is not useful; DHF is not significantly associated with secondary dengue infection; DHF results from infection with a 'virulent' dengue virus; DHF is owing to abnormal T-cell responses; DHF results from auto-immune responses; and DHF results from direct infection of endothelial cells.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchDengue VirusHumansSevere Dengue

Identifiers

PMID22668442
PMCPMC3381449
OpenAlexW2030771952

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.