Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31463180›Full record

ReviewPneumonia (Nathan Qld.)2019

Meningococcal pneumonia: a review.

Charles Feldman, Ronald Anderson

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pneumonia (Nathan Qld.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. [Neisseria meningitidis, beyond the afectation of the central nervous system].Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Non-serogroupableIDCases · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Charles Feldman1Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Ronald Anderson2Department of Immunology and Institute for Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
University of Pretoria · ZAUniversity of the Witwatersrand · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough

methodsWe conducted a review of the literature to describe the risk factors, pathogenesis, clinical features, diagnosis, treatment and prevention of meningococcal pneumonia.

resultsMeningococcal pneumonia was first described in 1907 and during the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic large numbers of cases of meningococcal pneumonia occurred in patients following the initial viral infection. A number of publications, mainly case series or case reports, has subsequently appeared in the literature. Meningococcal pneumonia occurs mainly with serogroups Y, W-135 and B. Risk factors for meningococcal pneumonia have not been well characterised, but appear to include older age, smoking, people living in close contact (e.g. military recruits and students at university), preceding viral and bacterial infections, haematological malignancies, chronic respiratory conditions and various other non-communicable and primary and secondary immunodeficiency diseases. Primary meningococcal pneumonia occurs in 5-10% of patients with meningococcal infection and is indistinguishable clinically from pneumonia caused by other common pathogens. Fever, chills and pleuritic chest pain are the most common symptoms, occurring in > 50% of cases. Productive sputum and dyspnoea are less common. Diagnosis of meningococcal pneumonia may be made by the isolation of the organism in sputum, blood, or normally sterile site cultures, but is likely to underestimate the frequency of meningococcal pneumonia. If validated, PCR-based techniques may be of value for diagnosis in the future. While penicillin was the treatment of choice for meningococcal infection, including pneumonia, prior to 1991, a third generation cephalosporin has been more commonly used thereafter, because of concerns of penicillin resistance. Chemoprophylaxis, using one of a number of antibiotics, has been recommended for close contacts of patients with meningococcal meningitis, and similar benefits may be seen in contacts of patients with meningococcal pneumonia. Effective vaccines are available for the prevention of infection with certain meningococcal serogroups, but this field is still evolving.

conclusionMeningococcal pneumonia occurs fairly frequently and should be considered as a possible cause of pneumonia, particularly in patients with specific risk factors.

Indexed as

AntibioticsChemoprophylaxisDiagnosisNeisseria meningitidisPathogenesisPneumoniaRisk factorsVaccination

Identifiers

PMID31463180
PMCPMC6708554
OpenAlexW2969730859

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.