ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2018
Validation of Decision Groups in Patients with Dengue Fever: A Study during 2015 Outbreak in Taiwan.
Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The management of dengue fever (DF) has been suggested to be categorized into decision groups A, B, and C; however, its usefulness in predicting mortality is still unclear, and hence we conducted this study to clarify this issue. We conducted a study by recruiting 2,358 patients with DF from the 2015 outbreak in the Chi-Mei Medical Center. Demographic data, vital signs, clinical symptoms and signs, coexisting morbidities, laboratory data, decision groups categorized according to World Health Organization for clinical management of dengue in 2012, and 30-day mortality rates were included for analysis. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 1.4%. The 30-day mortality rates in decision groups A, B, and C were 0%, 0.5%, and 46.2%, respectively. Compared with Group A, there was a higher mortality risk in Group C (odds ratio [OR]: 1,480, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 195-11,200). The area under the curve of the variable of Group C was excellent (OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.85-0.99). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for predicting 30-day mortality in Group C were 88.2%, 98.5%, 46.2%, and 99.8%, respectively. This study showed that decision Group C has a good predictive value for 30-day mortality. Further studies including validation in other nations are warranted.
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.