ArticleGerms2012
Measles laboratory-based surveillance in Zimbabwe during 2004-2009.
Article in Germs, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measles outbreak in Zimbabwe: An urgent rising concern.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Article
- Observational
- Epidemiological investigation of a case of chickenpox in a medical college in Kancheepuram, India.Germs · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionZimbabwe has for a long time satisfied measles elimination criteria according to the World Health Organization Regional Office for Africa (WHO/AFRO) measles surveillance standards. In this elimination phase laboratory based surveillance becomes critical as it gives evidence on the interruption of transmission of measles virus in the country hence the performance of the laboratory has to be monitored.
methodsThis retrospective study assesses measles laboratory performance in Zimbabwe from 2004 to 2009 by monitoring laboratory surveillance quality indicators against predefined WHO indicators.
resultsOverall, 92.20% of serum specimens arrived in the laboratory in good condition, 66.8% were received in the lab within the stipulated three days and 77% of the results were sent back to the national centers within 7 days. The laboratory passed all external proficiency tests from 2005 to 2009 with 100%. The laboratory sent 13.42% of representative sera for regional reference laboratory co-testing and the concordance of results was 98.33%. An average of 27.33% of patients with positive measles IgM had vaccination history. DISCUSSION: Available data shows that four out of the six WHO surveillance indicators were met by the national laboratory. The timeliness of specimen shipment to the lab needs to be improved and results should be communicated to the national centers in a timely manner. Cases with no vaccination history may be due to incompletely filled out forms or inadequate case investigation. Unvaccinated cases can accumulate over time and cause outbreaks.
conclusionThe results of the external proficiency tests show that the laboratory is performing well, with adherence to quality requirements, as indicated by proficiency tests with the regional reference laboratory. Hence the results generated by the laboratory may be reliable for surveillance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.