Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23041731›Full record

ReviewThe Indian journal of medical research2012

Dengue in India.

Nivedita Gupta, Sakshi Srivastava, Amita Jain, Umesh C Chaturvedi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Review in The Indian journal of medical research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 125 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
125citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

125 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article

65 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Nivedita GuptaIndian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi, India.
Sakshi Srivastava
Amita Jain
Umesh C Chaturvedi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dengue virus belongs to family Flaviviridae, having four serotypes that spread by the bite of infected Aedes mosquitoes. It causes a wide spectrum of illness from mild asymptomatic illness to severe fatal dengue haemorrhagic fever/dengue shock syndrome (DHF/DSS). Approximately 2.5 billion people live in dengue-risk regions with about 100 million new cases each year worldwide. The cumulative dengue diseases burden has attained an unprecedented proportion in recent times with sharp increase in the size of human population at risk. Dengue disease presents highly complex pathophysiological, economic and ecologic problems. In India, the first epidemic of clinical dengue-like illness was recorded in Madras (now Chennai) in 1780 and the first virologically proved epidemic of dengue fever (DF) occurred in Calcutta (now Kolkata) and Eastern Coast of India in 1963-1964. During the last 50 years a large number of physicians have treated and described dengue disease in India, but the scientific studies addressing various problems of dengue disease have been carried out at limited number of centres. Achievements of Indian scientists are considerable; however, a lot remain to be achieved for creating an impact. This paper briefly reviews the extent of work done by various groups of scientists in this country.

Indexed as

DengueDengue VirusHumansIndia

Identifiers

PMID23041731
PMCPMC3510884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.