Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26807916›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Estimating the Incidence of Acute Infectious Intestinal Disease in the Community in the UK: A Retrospective Telephone Survey.

Laura Viviani, Mike van der Es, Lisa Irvine, Clarence C Tam, Laura C Rodrigues, Kathryn A Jackson, Sarah J O'Brien, Paul R Hunter, IID2 Study Executive Committee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The Incidence of Acute Gastrointestinal Illness in Canada, Foodbook Survey 2014-2015.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2017
    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

9 authors.

Laura VivianiDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Mike van der EsThe Norwich School of Medicine, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.
Lisa IrvineThe Norwich School of Medicine, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.
Clarence C TamDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Laura C RodriguesDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Kathryn A JacksonInstitute of Infection and Global Health, Liverpool University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Sarah J O'BrienInstitute of Infection and Global Health, Liverpool University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Paul R HunterThe Norwich School of Medicine, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.
IID2 Study Executive Committee

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U122785837
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo estimate the burden of intestinal infectious disease (IID) in the UK and determine whether disease burden estimations using a retrospective study design differ from those using a prospective study design. DESIGN/

settingA retrospective telephone survey undertaken in each of the four countries comprising the United Kingdom. Participants were randomly asked about illness either in the past 7 or 28 days.

participants14,813 individuals for all of whom we had a legible recording of their agreement to participate. OUTCOMES: Self-reported IID, defined as loose stools or clinically significant vomiting lasting less than two weeks, in the absence of a known non-infectious cause.

resultsThe rate of self-reported IID varied substantially depending on whether asked for illness in the previous 7 or 28 days. After standardising for age and sex, and adjusting for the number of interviews completed each month and the relative size of each UK country, the estimated rate of IID in the 7-day recall group was 1,530 cases per 1,000 person-years (95% CI: 1135-2113), while in the 28-day recall group it was 533 cases per 1,000 person-years (95% CI: 377-778). There was no significant variation in rates between the four countries. Rates in this study were also higher than in a related prospective study undertaken at the same time.

conclusionsThe estimated burden of disease from IID varied dramatically depending on study design. Retrospective studies of IID give higher estimates of disease burden than prospective studies. Of retrospective studies longer recall periods give lower estimated rates than studies with short recall periods. Caution needs to be exercised when comparing studies of self-reported IID as small changes in study design or case definition can markedly affect estimated rates.

Indexed as

Health SurveysAcute DiseaseAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionChildChild, PreschoolCommunity-Acquired InfectionsDiarrheaEnteritisFemaleHumansIncidenceInfant

Identifiers

PMID26807916
PMCPMC4725772

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.