Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24120073›Full record

ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings2013

International travel by persons with medical comorbidities: understanding risks and providing advice.

Natasha S Hochberg, Elizabeth D Barnett, Lin H Chen, Mary E Wilson, Hari Iyer, William B MacLeod, Emad Yanni, Emily S Jentes, Adolf W Karchmer, Winnie Ooi and 3 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.8field-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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Cutaneous manifestations of infection in returning travelers.Current infectious disease reports · 2014
    Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

13 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Natasha S HochbergDepartment of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA; Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA. Electronic address: nhoch@bu.edu.
Elizabeth D Barnett
Lin H Chen
Mary E Wilson
Hari Iyer
William B MacLeod
Emad Yanni
Emily S Jentes
Adolf W Karchmer
Winnie Ooi
Laura Kogelman
Christine Benoit
Davidson H Hamer
Boston Medical Center · USBoston University · USCenter for Global Health · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USHarvard Global Health Institute · USLahey Hospital and Medical Center · USMount Auburn Hospital · USTufts Medical Center · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999PHS HHS U19C100508-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe the medical conditions, travel plans, counseling, and medications prescribed for high-risk international travelers. PATIENTS AND

methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted from March 1, 2008, through July 31, 2010, in 5 clinics in the greater Boston area. We assessed all travelers seen for pretravel care and compared demographic characteristics, travel plans, pretravel counseling, and interventions for healthy and high-risk travelers (as defined by medical history or pregnancy).

resultsOf 15,440 travelers, 2769 (17.9%) were high-risk; 644 of 2769 (23.3%) were immunocompromised travelers, 2056 (74.3%) had medical comorbidities, and 69 (2.5%) were pregnant women. The median age of high-risk travelers was 47 years compared with 32 years for healthy travelers (P=.0001). High-risk travelers visited the clinic a median of 25 days (range, 10-44 days) before departure. Overall, 2562 (93.9%) of high-risk travelers visited countries with medium or high risk of typhoid fever, 2340 (85.7%) visited malaria-risk countries, and 624 (22.8%) visited yellow fever-endemic countries. Of travelers to yellow fever-endemic countries, 8 of 23 (34.8%) pregnant women and 64 of 144 (44.4%) immunocompromised travelers received yellow fever vaccine. Of eligible high-risk travelers, 11 of 76 (14.5%) received a pneumococcal vaccine, 213 of 640 (33.3%) influenza vaccine, and 956 of 2681 (35.7%) either tetanus-diphtheria or tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis vaccine.

conclusionHigh-risk travelers made up nearly 20% of patients in these travel clinics, and they mostly traveled to destinations with malaria and typhoid risk. For health care professionals caring for travelers with underlying medical problems, providing appropriate travel counseling and making vaccine decisions, such as for yellow fever, are complex. Travelers with complicated medical histories may warrant evaluation by an experienced travel medicine specialist.

Indexed as

ComorbidityCounselingAdultBostonCommunicable DiseasesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsTravelTravel MedicineBATMNBoston Area Travel Medicine NetworkCDCCenters for Disease Control and PreventionHIVhuman immunodeficiency virusVFRvisiting friends and relativesyellow feverYF

Identifiers

PMID24120073
PMCPMC12224180
OpenAlexW2062884305

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.