ReviewBMC public health2020
Revisiting the epidemiology of pertussis in Canada, 1924-2015: a literature review, evidence synthesis, and modeling study.
Review in BMC public health, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laboratory diagnosis of pertussis: A survey on provincial public health laboratory methods.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2026Article
- Test-adjusted estimation for pertussis incidence in greater Toronto, Canada, 1993-2006.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- A century of weekly notifiable disease incidence data by province in Canada.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDisease surveillance is central to the public health understanding of pertussis epidemiology. In Canada, public reporting practices have significantly changed over time, creating challenges in accurately characterizing pertussis epidemiology. Debate has emerged over whether pertussis resurged after the introduction of adsorbed pertussis vaccines (1981-1985), and if the incidence fell to its pre-1985 after the introduction of acellular pertussis vaccines (1997-1998). Here, we aim to assemble a unified picture of pertussis disease incidence in Canada.
methodsUsing publicly available pertussis surveillance reports, we collected, analyzed and presented Canadian pertussis data for the period (1924-2015), encompassing the pre-vaccine era, introduction of vaccine, changes to vaccine technology, and the introduction of booster doses. Information on age began to be reported since 1952, but age reporting practices (full, partial or no ages) have evolved over time, and varied across provinces/territories. For those cases reported without age each year, we impute an age distribution by assuming it follows that of the age-reported cases.
resultsBelow the age of 20 years, the adjusted age-specific incidence from 1969 to 1988 is substantially higher than existing estimates. In children < 1 year, the incidence in some years was comparable to that during the 1988-1999 resurgence.
conclusionsThe results presented here suggest that the surge in the average yearly incidence of pertussis that began in 1988 was weaker than previously inferred, and in contrary to the past findings, below age 5, the average yearly incidence of pertussis from 1999 to 2015 (when the incidence dropped again) has been lower than it was from 1969 to 1988.
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.