ArticleNorth Carolina medical journal
Estimating the Burden of Pandemic Infectious Disease: The Case of the Second Wave of Pandemic Influenza H1N1 in Forsyth County, North Carolina.
Article in North Carolina medical journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment Coverage Estimation for Mass Drug Administration for Malaria with Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine in Southern Province, Zambia.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2020Trial
- Getting a grippe on severity: a retrospective comparison of influenza-related hospitalizations and deaths captured in reportable disease and administrative data sources in Ontario, Canada.BMC public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding the burden of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus during the second wave of 2009-2010 is important for future pandemic planning.
methodsPersons who presented to the emergency department (ED) or were hospitalized with fever and/or acute respiratory symptoms at the academic medical center in Forsyth County, North Carolina were prospectively enrolled and underwent nasal/throat swab testing for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09. Laboratory-confirmed cases of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus identified through active surveillance were compared by capture-recapture analysis to those identified through independent, passive surveillance (physician-ordered influenza testing). This approach estimated the number of total cases, including those not captured by either surveillance method. A second analysis estimated the total number of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 cases by multiplying weekly influenza percentages determined via active surveillance by weekly counts of influenza-associated discharge diagnoses from administrative data. Market share adjustments were used to estimate influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus ED visits or hospitalizations per 1,000 residents.
resultsCapture-recapture analysis estimated that 753 residents (95% confidence interval [CI], 424-2,735) with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus were seen in the academic medical center from September 2009 through mid-April 2010; this result yielded an estimated 4.7 (95% CI, 2.6-16.9) influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus ED visits or hospitalizations per 1,000 residents. Similarly, 708 visits were estimated using weekly influenza percentages and influenza-associated discharge diagnoses, yielding an estimated 4.4 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus ED visits or hospitalizations per 1,000 residents.
conclusionThis study demonstrates that the burden of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus in ED and inpatient settings by capture-recapture analysis was 4-5 per 1,000 residents; this rate was approximately 8-fold higher than that detected by physician-ordered influenza testing.
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.