ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2014
Serodiagnosis as adjunct assay for pertussis infection in São Paulo, Brazil.
Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- SEVERE PERTUSSIS IN CHILDHOOD: UPDATE AND CONTROVERSY - SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo · 2019Pooled it
- Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diagnosis and Management of Cough-Chinese Thoracic Society (CTS) Asthma Consortium.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018Review
- Article
- Expanding Pertussis Epidemiology in 6 Latin America Countries through the Latin American Pertussis Project.Emerging infectious diseases · 2017Article
- Evaluation of Commercial Assays for Single-Point Diagnosis of Pertussis in the US.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2017Article
- Immune persistence after pertussis vaccination.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pertussis remains an important public health problem in many countries despite extensive immunization. Cultures and real-time PCR (RT-PCR) assays are the recommended pertussis diagnostic tests, but they lack sensitivity at the later stage of the disease. This study introduces the IgG anti-pertussis toxin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (PT ELISA) in our routine diagnosis to improve disease burden estimation. Serum samples and nasopharyngeal swabs (n = 503) were collected at the same time from patients presenting with cough illness suspected of being pertussis and tested by the PT ELISA and culture and/or RT-PCR, respectively. Patients were separated into three age groups: group 1, <1 year (n = 260; mean age, 3 months), group 2, 1 to 6 years (n = 81; mean age, 3 years), and group 3, ≥7 years (n = 162; mean age, 26 years). The times (means) from cough onset to specimen collection were 16, 24, and 26 days, respectively. In group 1, 83 (82.2%) of 101 positive cases were positive for pertussis by culture/RT-PCR, while 40 (39.6%) tested positive by PT ELISA. In group 2, 6 (19.4%) of 31 positive cases were culture/RT-PCR positive, and 29 (93.6%) were seropositive. In group 3, 13 (13.8%) of 94 positive cases were positive by culture/RT-PCR and 91 (96.8%) were positive by serology. Culture/RT-PCR detected more cases of pertussis in infants (P < 0.0001), whereas the PT ELISA detected more cases in adolescents and adults (P < 0.0001). The timing between cough onset and specimen collection or recent vaccination may have partially affected our results. Serology is a suitable, cost-effective, and complementary pertussis diagnostic tool, especially among older children, adolescents, and adults during the later disease phase.
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.