ArticleRevista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical2022
Burden of syphilis in Brazil and federated units, 1990-2016: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.
Article in Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends in the incidence of common sexually transmitted infections at the global, regional and national levels, 1990-2021: results of the Global Burden of Disease 2021 study.Tropical medicine and health · 2025Article
- Global, regional, and national burden and trends of syphilis among women of childbearing age from 1990 to 2021.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Prenatal syphilis and adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with HIV receiving ART in Brazil: a population-based study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2024Article
- Global, regional, and national burden of syphilis, 1990-2021 and predictions by Bayesian age-period-cohort analysis: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2021.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSyphilis is a chronic infectious disease that has created challenging situations for humanity for centuries. Transmission can occur sexually or vertically, with great repercussions on populations, particularly among women and children. The present study presents information on the main burden imposed by syphilis generated by the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2019 for Brazil and its 27 federated units.
methodsWe described the metrics of incidence, deaths, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), standardized by age and per 100,000 inhabitants, from 1990 to 2019, and we compared the disease burden between the years 1990 and 2019.
resultsIn Brazil, the disease burden increased between 2005 and 2019 for all metrics. Although a higher incidence of syphilis was found among women in 2019, DALYs [YLLs (males: 15.9%; females: 21.8%), YLDs (males: 25.0%; females: 50.0%), and DALYs (males: 16.2%; females: 22.4%)] were higher among men. In 2019, the highest DALY rate per 100,000 inhabitants was observed in individuals aged above 50 years. The State of Maranhão presented the highest values of DALYs {1990: 165.2 [95% uncertainty interval (UI) 96.2-264.4]; 2005: 43.8 [95% UI 30.3-62.4]; 2019: 29.1 [95% UI 19.8-41.1]} per 100,000 inhabitants in the three years analyzed.
conclusionsThe burden of syphilis has increased in recent years. Men presented higher DALYs, although the incidence of the disease was higher in women. Syphilis affects a large number of people across all age groups, causing different degrees of disability and premature death (DALYs).
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.