Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27528377›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2016

Pertussis in infants: an underestimated disease.

Anna Chiara Vittucci, Valentina Spuri Vennarucci, Annalisa Grandin, Cristina Russo, Laura Lancella, Albero Eugenio Tozzi, Andrea Bartuli, Alberto Villani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Pertussis prevalence among adult patients with acute cough.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2022
    Article
  9. Experts' Opinion for Improving Pertussis Vaccination Rates in Adolescents and Adults: A Call to Action.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
  10. Pertussis in Italy: how to protect the "unprotectable"?Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021
    Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors.

Anna Chiara VittucciGeneral Pediatric and Infectious Diseases Unit, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, IRCCS, Rome, Italy. annachiara.vittucci@opbg.net.
Valentina Spuri VennarucciVirology Unit, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Annalisa GrandinGeneral Pediatric and Infectious Diseases Unit, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Cristina RussoVirology Unit, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Laura LancellaGeneral Pediatric and Infectious Diseases Unit, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Albero Eugenio TozziEpidemiology Unit, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Andrea BartuliRare Disease and Medical Genetics Unit, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Alberto VillaniGeneral Pediatric and Infectious Diseases Unit, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe clinical diagnosis of pertussis is not easy in early infancy since clinical manifestations can overlap with several different diseases. Many cases are often misclassified and underdiagnosed. We conducted a retrospective study on infants to assess how often physicians suspected pertussis and the actual frequency of Bordetella pertussis infections.

methodsWe analyzed all infants with age ≤90 days hospitalized from March 2011 until September 2013 for acute respiratory symptoms tested with a Real Time Polymerase Chain Reaction able to detect Bordetella pertussis and with a Real Time Polymerase Chain Reaction for a multipanel respiratory virus. Therefore, we compared patients with pertussis positive aspirate, patients with respiratory virus positive aspirate and patients with negative aspirate to identify symptoms or clinical findings predictive of pertussis.

resultsOut of 215 patients analyzed, 53 were positive for pertussis (24.7 %), 119 were positive for respiratory virus (55.3 %) and 43 had a negative aspirate (20 %). Pertussis was suspected in 22 patients at admission and 16 of them were confirmed by laboratory tests, while 37 infants with different admission diagnosis resulted positive for pertussis. The sensitivity of clinical diagnosis was 30.2 % and the specificity 96.3 %. Infants with pertussis had more often paroxysmal cough, absence of fever and a higher absolute lymphocyte count than infants without pertussis.

conclusionsPertussis is a serious disease in infants and it is often unrecognized; some features should help pediatricians to suspect pertussis, but clinical suspicion has a low sensitivity. We suggest a systematic use of Real Time Polymerase Chain Reaction to support the clinical suspicion of pertussis in patients with less than 3 months of age hospitalized with acute respiratory symptoms.

Indexed as

Bordetella pertussisDNA, BacterialFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleOdds RatioReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityWhooping CoughDNA, BacterialBordetella pertussisInfantsReal time polymerase chain reactionRespiratory symptomsResurgence

Identifiers

PMID27528377
PMCPMC4986228

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.