ArticleBMC infectious diseases2019
Circulation of influenza A and B in the Czech Republic from 2000-2001 to 2015-2016.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The mediating role of acute respiratory infections in temperature-mortality associations in the Czech Republic, 1982-2019.International journal of biometeorology · 2026Article
- Links between influenza epidemics, weather characteristics and all-cause mortality in the Czech Republic, 1982-2020.BMC public health · 2025Article
- The Influenza Season: A Comparative Study of Admission Rates and Influenza Vaccinations in the Kingdom of Bahrain.Cureus · 2025Article
- Influenza-Related Deaths in the Czech Republic Over 21 Seasons.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2025Article
- The Global Influenza Hospital Surveillance Network: A Multicountry Public Health Collaboration.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2025Article
- Spread of Influenza Viruses in Poland and Neighboring Countries in Seasonal Terms.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo improve national influenza vaccination recommendations, additional data on influenza A and B virus circulation are needed. Here, we describe the circulation of influenza A and B in the Czech Republic during 16 seasons.
methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of data collected from the 2000-2001 to 2015-2016 influenza seasons by the Czech Republic national influenza surveillance network. Influenza was confirmed and viral isolates subtyped by virological assays followed by antigen detection or by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction.
resultsOf 16,940 samples collected, 5144 (30.4%) were influenza-positive. Influenza A represented 78.6% of positive cases overall and accounted for more than 55.0% of all influenza cases in every season, except for 2005-2006 (6.0%). Both A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 were detected in most seasons, except for 2001-2002 and 2003-2004 (only A/H3N2), and 2007-2008 and 2009-2010 (only A/H1N1). Influenza B represented 21.4% of positive cases overall (range, 0.0-94.0% per season). Both influenza B lineages were detected in three seasons, a single B lineage in 11, and no B strain in two. For the 11 seasons where influenza B accounted for ≥20% of positive cases, the dominant lineage was Yamagata in six and Victoria in four. In the remaining season, the two lineages co-circulated. For two seasons (2005-2006 and 2007-2008), the B lineage in the trivalent influenza vaccine did not match the dominant circulating B lineage.
conclusionsIn the Czech Republic, during the 2000-2001 to 2015-2016 influenza seasons, influenza virus circulation varied considerably. Although influenza A accounted for the most cases in almost all seasons, influenza B made a substantial, sometimes dominant, contribution to influenza disease.
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.