ArticleBMC public health2017
Epidemiology of pertussis in Alberta, Canada 2004-2015.
Article in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A multi-country, multi-year, meta-analytic evaluation of the sex differences in age-specific pertussis incidence rates.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Determinants of parental vaccine hesitancy in Canada: results from the 2017 Childhood National Immunization Coverage Survey.BMC public health · 2023Article
- The data used to build the models: Pertussis morbidity and mortality burden considering various Brazilian data sources.Vaccine · 2021Article
- Revisiting the epidemiology of pertussis in Canada, 1924-2015: a literature review, evidence synthesis, and modeling study.BMC public health · 2020Review
- Alarm Thresholds for Pertussis Outbreaks in Iran: National Data Analysis.Osong public health and research perspectives · 2020Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe describe the epidemiology of pertussis in Alberta, Canada by person, place, and time between 2004 and 2015, identify outbreak years, and examine vaccination coverage and vaccination timeliness.
methodsWe used health data from Alberta's Communicable Disease Registry System for the period of January 1, 2004 through August 31, 2015 to identify unique cases of pertussis. Unique cases were deterministically linked to data in Alberta's immunization repository and health care insurance plan registry. Population estimates and vaccination coverage were extracted from Alberta's online Interactive Health Data Application. We estimated pertussis incidence rates per 100,000 persons by year, age group, gender, and health zone. Outbreak years were identified using a one-sided cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis by comparing annual incidence rates to baseline rates.
resultsOver the period, 3510 cases of pertussis were confirmed by laboratory testing or epidemiological linkage. Incidence rates per 100,000 persons were highest in 2004 (20.5), 2005 (13.6), and 2015 (10.4) for all age groups. Incidence rates were highest among the youngest age groups and decreased as age groups increased. Based on CUSUM analysis, 2008 and 2012 met the criteria for outbreak years. Vaccination coverage was over 90% among the general population, however only 61% of cases received at least one dose. About 60% of cases were diagnosed 5+ years after receiving the vaccine. Approximately 87-91% of vaccinated cases did not receive the first three vaccine doses in a timely manner.
conclusionPertussis incidence rates fluctuated over the period across all age groups. The majority of cases had no record of vaccination or were delayed in receiving vaccines. CUSUM analysis was an effective method for identifying outbreaks.
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.