ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2018
A retrospective observational analysis of post-pandemic influenza-related outcomes in the United Kingdom, 2010-2014.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2018. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study set out to evaluate influenza- and respiratory-related illnesses recorded during primary care physician consultations in England following the H1N1 pandemic in 2009 and to enable the development of a dynamic disease model. Data were obtained from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink of primary care records over four influenza seasons (2010-2014). The primary outcome of the study was incidence of influenza- and respiratory-related diagnoses, calculated per practice and by season and age group. Upper respiratory tract infection diagnoses were most frequently recorded (mean seasonal practice level incidence; 3,762 consultations per 100,000 [SD = 1,989]), and influenza-related diagnoses were least frequently recorded across all seasons, except one. Incidence rates for the under 18 population were higher than those for the general population, in particular for upper respiratory tract infection (range of 8,024-9,950 versus 3,228-4,120, respectively) and otitis media diagnoses (2,668-3,652 versus 782-1,057, respectively). For influenza-related diagnoses, the 65+ age group, the 0 to <2 and 2 to <4 groups had a higher risk (risk ratio = 1.33, 1.12 and 1.16, respectively) than other age groups. This study provides valuable insight into the incidence of influenza- and respiratory-related diagnoses in the primary care setting in England, and suggests a higher burden of disease in young children and the elderly. The study also indicates that some influenza illness is likely to be reported under respiratory-related diagnoses, given the low incidence of influenza-related diagnoses in the study.
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.