ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2020
Development and Validation of a simple score for diagnosis of Leptospirosis at outpatient departments.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early diagnosis and treatment of leptospirosis: Optimizing clinical outcomes.The Journal of infection · 2026Review
- Leptospirosis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025Review
- Leptospirosis-Improving Healthcare Outcomes for a Neglected Tropical Disease.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Review
- Diagnosis and Clinical Description of Leptospirosis Cases Identified Through Hospital-Based Active Surveillance in Puerto Rico, 2019-2021.Journal of tropical medicine · 2025Article
- Prevalence and risk factors of bovine leptospirosis in the Ecuadorian Amazon.Veterinary world · 2024Article
- C-reactive protein: An easy marker for early differentiation between leptospirosis and dengue fever in endemic area.PloS one · 2023Article
- Leptospira interrogans insoluble fraction as a potential antigen source for lateral flow immunochromatography.Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz · 2023Article
- Clinical Evaluation of the Modified Faine Criteria in Patients Admitted with Suspected Leptospirosis to the Territorial Hospital, New Caledonia, 2018 to 2019.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2022Article
- The role of leptospiremia and specific immune response in severe leptospirosis.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Clinical profile, management and outcome of patients with leptospirosis during the times of COVID-19 pandemic: A prospective study from a tertiary care centre in South India.Le infezioni in medicina · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLeptospirosis is an important zoonotic disease within the tropics. Diagnosing leptospirosis is a clinical obstacle, as clinical presentations are similar to other tropical infectious diseases. Available serological tests are often insensitive and not cost-effective. Many clinical diagnostic scorings had been developed but most were based on hospitalized patients, and wound not be suitable for use in suspected patients in setting of ambulatory care.
objectivesTo develop and internal validate multivariable diagnostic prediction score of leptospirosis in patients suspicious of leptospirosis at out-patient clinics of community hospitals. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe performed a prospective, multisite diagnostic prediction research with development of a diagnostic score. The development cohort was based on patients suspicious of leptospirosis who visited five community hospitals in Si Sa Ket province, Thailand during December 2017 to November 2018. Leptospirosis confirmed cases were defined when one of the three standard confirmatory tests was positive. Multivariable logistic regression was used for score derivation. Test of AuROC equality was done to compare diagnostic performance of the newly derived score and conventional WHO score.
resultsA total of 262 leptospirosis suspicious patients were enrolled. Eighty-two patients (31.5%) were leptospirosis confirmed cases. Five final predictors remained within the reduced logistic model which were history of exposure to wet ground at workplace, history of contact water reservoir used by animal, urine protein and urine blood positive from dipstick test, and neutrophil count from CBC ≥80%. The OPD score diagnostic performance was AuROC 0.72 (95%CI 0.65-0.79). Test of equality revealed significant differences of AuROC between the OPD and WHO score (0.72 vs 0.62, p-value 0.014). Patients were categorized into low and high probability of having leptospirosis at score point of 3.5 with sensitivity 72.4% and specificity 61.7%.
conclusionsThis study developed and internal validated the OPD score. This clinical risk score could be one of the important tools for diagnosis of leptospirosis at the outpatient clinic.
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.