ArticlePloS one2016
Differences in the Epidemiology of Childhood Infections with Avian Influenza A H7N9 and H5N1 Viruses.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practical integrated healthcare prevention and management of children's health quality of respiratory functions: a systematic review.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Impact of the R292K Mutation on Influenza A (H7N9) Virus Resistance towards Peramivir: A Molecular Dynamics Perspective.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Prevention of Emerging Infections in Children.Pediatric clinics of North America · 2022Review
- Emergent Pneumonia in Children.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Review
- Emerging Respiratory Viruses in Children.Infectious disease clinics of North America · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The difference between childhood infections with avian influenza viruses A(H5N1) and A(H7N9) remains an unresolved but critically important question. We compared the epidemiological characteristics of 244 H5N1 and 41 H7N9 childhood cases (<15 years old), as well as the childhood cluster cases of the two viruses. Our findings revealed a higher proportion of H5N1 than H7N9 childhood infections (31.1% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.000). However, the two groups did not differ significantly in age (median age: 5.0 vs. 5.5 y, p = 0.0651). The proportion of clustered cases was significantly greater among children infected with H5N1 than among children infected with H7N9 [46.7% (71/152) vs. 23.6% (13/55), p = 0.005], and most of the childhood cases were identified as secondary cases [46.4% (45/97) vs. 33.3% (10/30), p = 0.000]. Mild status accounted for 79.49% and 22.66%, severe status for 17.95% and 2.34%, and fatal cases for 2.56% and 75.00% of the H7N9 and H5N1 childhood infection cases (all p<0.05), respectively. The fatality rates for the total, index and secondary childhood cluster cases were 52.86% (37/70), 88.5% (23/26) and 33.33% (15/45), respectively, in the H5N1 group, whereas no fatal H7N9 childhood cluster cases were identified. In conclusion, lower severity and greater transmission were found in the H7N9 childhood cases than in the H5N1 childhood cases.
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.