ArticleNew microbes and new infections2018
Article in New microbes and new infections, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Systematic review ofOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Review
- Development of in-house PCR assays and cross-sectional molecular surveillance of infectious pathogens in adverse pregnancy outcomes and neonatal sepsis in central India.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Evidence ofNew microbes and new infections · 2025Review
- Molecular examination for Coxiella burnetii and Brucella spp. infections in Iranian women experiencing spontaneous miscarriage.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Human-biting ticks and zoonotic tick-borne pathogens in North Africa: diversity, distribution, and trans-Mediterranean public health challenges.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Review
- Reproductive Disorders in Domestic Ruminants: A One Health Concern.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- FromPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrigendum to2019
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated Q fever infection in Febrile Spontaneous Abortions in women by using a serologic method (Immuno-Fluorescence Assay, IFA) and a molecular method (real-time quantitative PCR, qPCR) in Obstetric-Gynaecology (OB-GYN) services in two hospitals in Algiers. We included in the case group 380 women who experienced Febrile Spontaneous Abortion; the control group comprised 345 women who gave birth without any other infections or complications. Among the 725 women included, antibodies against
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.