ArticleRevista espanola de salud publica2017
[Outbreak of Whooping cough in 2016.Écija, Seville, Spain].
Article in Revista espanola de salud publica, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWhooping cough is a global public health problem, is a highly contagious disease, and despite universal vaccination increased incidence is observed. The aim of this study was to describe the investigation of a population outbreak.
methodsA descriptive study of a population outbreak of whooping cough between February and June 2016 in Ecija (Seville). Case and outbreak definitions was taken of Whooping Cough Monitoring Protocol. Information was collected from Health History, Epidemiological Monitoring System and Laboratory. For statistical analysis used the free software R, for measuring quantitative variables were presented, median, standard deviation, minimum and maximum values and percentiles for qualitative variables frequency distribution.
results91 suspected cases were identified, ruling 33. Of the remaining 58, 42 cases were confirmed and 16 probable cases. The cases have presented an average age of 10,24 years. 62,1% of cases occurred in women. The incidence during the duration of the outbreak was 148,51 cases/100.000 people globally, and 851,06 cases/100.000 people in under 14 years. All children under 18 years were successfully vaccinated in primary vaccination and only 2 children lacked the fifth dose. The average time between onset of symptoms and diagnosis was 24,86 days.
conclusionsThe establishment of monitoring and control measures have managed to limit and resolve the outbreak. It is recommended to enhance the information and coordination between the various levels of care (Primary care/Specialist) and professionals (Clinical/Epidemiology).
Indexed as
Identifiers
28098135PMC11587347What 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.