Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24860791›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2014

To be or not to be associated: power study of four statistical modeling approaches to identify parasite associations in cross-sectional studies.

Elise Vaumourin, Gwenaël Vourc'h, Sandra Telfer, Xavier Lambin, Diaeldin Salih, Ulrike Seitzer, Serge Morand, Nathalie Charbonnel, Muriel Vayssier-Taussat, Patrick Gasqui

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Coinfection by multipleMicrobiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Spatial and Temporal Circulation ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Co-infection of Ticks: The Rule Rather Than the Exception.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2016
    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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Elise VaumourinINRA, UR346 Epidémiologie Animale Saint Genès Champanelle, France ; INRA-Anses-ENVA, USC BIPAR Maisons-Alfort, France.
Gwenaël Vourc'hINRA, UR346 Epidémiologie Animale Saint Genès Champanelle, France.
Sandra TelferSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen Aberdeen, UK.
Xavier LambinSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen Aberdeen, UK.
Diaeldin SalihDepartment of Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases, Veterinary Research Institute Khartoum, Sudan.
Ulrike SeitzerDivision of Veterinary-Infection Biology and Immunology, Research Center Borstel Borstel, Germany.
Serge MorandInstitut des Sciences de l'Evolution (CNRS /IRD / UM2), University of Montpellier 2 Montpellier, France ; Animal et Gestion Intégrée des Risques, CIRAD Montpellier, France.
Nathalie CharbonnelINRA, UMR CBGP (INRA / IRD / CIRAD / Montpellier SupAgro) Montpellier, France.
Muriel Vayssier-TaussatINRA-Anses-ENVA, USC BIPAR Maisons-Alfort, France.
Patrick GasquiINRA, UR346 Epidémiologie Animale Saint Genès Champanelle, France.
Bipar · FRUniversity of Aberdeen · GBCentre de Biologie et de Gestion des Populations · FRInstitut des Sciences de l'Evolution de Montpellier · FR

Funding

Wellcome Trust 095171
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A growing number of studies are reporting simultaneous infections by parasites in many different hosts. The detection of whether these parasites are significantly associated is important in medicine and epidemiology. Numerous approaches to detect associations are available, but only a few provide statistical tests. Furthermore, they generally test for an overall detection of association and do not identify which parasite is associated with which other one. Here, we developed a new approach, the association screening approach, to detect the overall and the detail of multi-parasite associations. We studied the power of this new approach and of three other known ones (i.e., the generalized chi-square, the network and the multinomial GLM approaches) to identify parasite associations either due to parasite interactions or to confounding factors. We applied these four approaches to detect associations within two populations of multi-infected hosts: (1) rodents infected with Bartonella sp., Babesia microti and Anaplasma phagocytophilum and (2) bovine population infected with Theileria sp. and Babesia sp. We found that the best power is obtained with the screening model and the generalized chi-square test. The differentiation between associations, which are due to confounding factors and parasite interactions was not possible. The screening approach significantly identified associations between Bartonella doshiae and B. microti, and between T. parva, T. mutans, and T. velifera. Thus, the screening approach was relevant to test the overall presence of parasite associations and identify the parasite combinations that are significantly over- or under-represented. Unraveling whether the associations are due to real biological interactions or confounding factors should be further investigated. Nevertheless, in the age of genomics and the advent of new technologies, it is a considerable asset to speed up researches focusing on the mechanisms driving interactions between parasites.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalParasitesAlgorithmsAnimalsCoinfectionComputer SimulationCross-Sectional StudiesHumansParasitic Diseasesassociationschi-square testGLM approachinteractionsmodelingnetwork modelparasite communityscreening

Identifiers

PMID24860791
PMCPMC4030204
OpenAlexW2146899231

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.