ArticleMedicine2020
Viral shedding in patients with hand, foot and mouth disease induced by EV71, CA16, or CA6: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel NSAID-Se derivative YSN-1-167 against Enterovirus 71 infection by inhibiting 3DAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026Article
- Clinical, aetiological, and epidemiological studies of outpatient cases of hand, foot, and mouth disease in Chengdu, China, from 2019 to 2022: a retrospective study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Reverse Genetic Approaches for the Generation of Full Length and Subgenomic Replicon of EV71 Virus.Frontiers in microbiology · 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD) has been an important public health concern worldwide, especially in the Asia-Pacific region. Unfortunately, the effect of current measures on preventing and controlling HFMD may be limited. Isolation of infectious sources is reported as an important way to prevent and control this disease. The isolation period is determined on the basis of duration of viral shedding in patients with HFMD. However, the results of previous researches on duration of viral shedding remain controversial. Here, we present a protocol of a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis for assessing the duration of viral shedding in patients with HFMD induced by Enterovirus 71 (EV71), Coxsackievirus A16 (CA16), or Coxsackievirus A6 (CA6). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A comprehensive literature search will be performed in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), and Wanfang Database, covering the period from inception to May 1, 2019. Point estimate of positive rate with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of EV71, CA16, or CA6 in HFMD patients' fecal or throat samples will be carried out using STATA 14.0. Subgroup analyses will be performed for mild cases, severe cases, and close contacts. Sensitive analysis will also be performed to evaluate the influences of individual studies on the final effect by exclusion of a few articles of poor quality. We will assess the risk of bias for the final studies included in our meta-analysis using previously available tools and the modified risk of bias tool.
resultsThe results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
conclusionTo the best of our knowledge, this paper will be the first systematic review and meta-analysis for assessing the duration of viral shedding in patients with HFMD induced by EV71, CA16, or CA6. The conclusions drawn from this review will provide the scientific basis to formulate the isolation period of HFMD. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical review is not required as this article is for a systematic review since there is no direct involvement of patients in the whole process. We will publish the results of this systematic review and meta-analysis of single-arm studies in a peer-reviewed journal. REGISTRATION NUMBER: Prospero CRD42020139999.
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.