ArticlePloS one2020
Clinical and epidemiological features of pertussis in Salvador, Brazil, 2011-2016.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pertussis, a severe respiratory infection caused by Bordetella pertussis, is distributed globally. Vaccination has been crucial to annual reductions in the number of cases. However, disease reemergence has occurred over the last decade in several countries, including Brazil. Here we describe the clinical and epidemiological aspects of suspected pertussis cases in Salvador, Brazil, and evaluate factors associated with case confirmation. This descriptive and retrospective study was conducted in the five hospitals in Salvador that reported the highest number of pertussis cases between 2011-2016. Demographic and clinical data were recorded for each patient. Bivariate analysis was performed to evaluate differences between groups (confirmed vs. unconfirmed cases) using Pearson's Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. Results: Of 529 suspected pertussis cases, 29.7% (157/529) were confirmed by clinical, clinical-epidemiological or laboratory criteria, with clinical criteria most frequently applied (63.7%; 100/157). Unvaccinated individuals (43.3%; 68/157) were the most affected, followed by age groups 2-3 months (37.6%; 59/157) and <2 months (31.2%; 49/157). Overall, ≤50% of the confirmed cases presented a complete vaccination schedule. All investigated cases presented cough in association with one or more symptoms, especially paroxysmal cough (66.9%; 105/529) (p = 0.001) or cyanosis (66.2%; 104/529) (p<0.001). Our results indicate that pertussis occurred mainly in infants and unvaccinated individuals in Salvador, Brazil. The predominance of clinical criteria used to confirm suspected cases highlights the need for improvement in the laboratory tools used to perform rapid diagnosis. Fluctuations in infection prevalence demonstrate the importance of vaccination strategies in improving the control and prevention of pertussis.
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.