ArticleMicroorganisms2022
Article in Microorganisms, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of intestinal parasites and Helicobacter pylori co-infection in people with gastrointestinal symptoms in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Burden of intestinal protozoan parasites coinciding with Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with gastrointestinal symptoms.Gut pathogens · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Uptake ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Prevalence and detection of Tropheryma whipplei in the stools of Korean patients with diarrhea using real-time PCRs.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2022Article
- Design of a Multi-Epitope Vaccine againstVaccines · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Tropheryma whipplei (TW), Helicobacter pylori (HP), and intestinal protozoa (IP) are widespread pathogens with similar routes of transmission and epidemiological risk factors. Epidemiological data on co-infection between TW, HP, and IP are scarce. We aim to more deeply investigate the co-infection rate for these pathogens, evaluating the risk factors and symptoms. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study conducted at the IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital in Northern Italy, a referral center for tropical and Whipple’s disease (WD). Stored stool samples from 143 subjects previously tested for TW DNA by real-time PCR were explored for HP and IP DNA detection. The virulence factor cagA was investigated in HP-positive patients. Results: A history of migration was reported significantly more in TW-positive than in negative subjects (34.1% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.001) and in HP-infected than in those non-infected (59.1% vs. 9.1%, p < 0.001). The HP infection rate differed significantly between TW-infected and uninfected groups (31.8% vs. 8.1%, p = 0.001), while no difference was observed for IP infection. Significantly higher TW intestinal colonization was found in HP-infected patients than in non-infected (63.6% vs. 24.8%, p < 0.001). In addition, the proportion of Blastocysts positive finding was also significantly higher in HP-infected than in non-infected (40.9% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.018). Conclusions: The present study is the first to report a high TW and HP co-infection rate. To reduce the risk of morbidity from a chronic infection of either pathogen, clinicians may consider TW-HP molecular screening on the same stool sample for patients with suspected HP disease or WD, particularly in case of travel history.
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.