Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37638375›Full record

ReviewGlobal epidemiology2023

Modifiable risk factors for diphtheria: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Juniorcaius Ikejezie, Busola Adebusoye, Winifred Ekezie, Tessa Langley, Sarah Lewis, Revati Phalkey

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Global epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Serological evaluation of immunity againstHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Juniorcaius IkejezieDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, UK.
Busola AdebusoyeDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, UK.
Winifred EkezieDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, UK.
Tessa LangleyDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, UK.
Sarah LewisDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, UK.
Revati PhalkeyDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, UK.
University of Nottingham · GBHeidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To identify modifiable risk factors for diphtheria and assess their strengths of association with the disease. Methods: This review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Electronic databases and grey literature were searched from inception until January 2023. Studies had to report on diphtheria cases and estimates of association for at least one potential risk factor or sufficient data to calculate these. The quality of non-ecological studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), while the quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Results: The search yielded 37,705 papers, of which 29 were ultimately included. All the non-ecological studies were of moderate to high quality. Meta-analysis of 20 studies identified three factors increasing the risk of diphtheria: incomplete vaccination (<3 doses) (pooled odds ratio (POR) = 2.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.4-3.4); contact with a person with skin lesions (POR = 4.8, 95% CI = 2.1-10.9); and low knowledge of diphtheria (POR = 2.4, 95% CI = 1.2-4.7). Contact with a case of diphtheria; sharing a bed or bedroom; sharing utensils, cups, and glasses; infrequent bathing; and low parental education were associated with diphtheria in multiple studies. Evidence for other factors was inconclusive. The quality of evidence was low or very low for all the risk factors. Conclusions: Findings from the review suggest that countries seeking to control diphtheria need to strengthen surveillance, improve vaccination coverage, and increase people's knowledge of the disease. Future research should focus on understudied or inconclusive risk factors.

Indexed as

DiphtheriaInfectious diseasemeta-analysisRisk factorsSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37638375
PMCPMC10445968
OpenAlexW4321460209

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.