Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38304952›Full record

SynthesisEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin2024

Determining the timing of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) epidemics: a systematic review, 2016 to 2021; method categorisation and identification of influencing factors.

Lisa Staadegaard, Michel Dückers, Jojanneke van Summeren, Rob van Gameren, Clarisse Demont, Mathieu Bangert, You Li, Jean-Sebastien Casalegno, Saverio Caini, John Paget

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2024
    Article
  11. Spatial and temporal variability of respiratory syncytial virus disease seasonality in Japan, 2012-2024.Pediatrics international : official journal of the Japan Pediatric Society
    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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Lisa StaadegaardNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (Nivel), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Michel DückersARQ National Psychotrauma Centre, Diemen, The Netherlands.
Jojanneke van SummerenNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (Nivel), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Rob van GamerenNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (Nivel), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Clarisse DemontSanofi Pasteur, Lyon, France.
Mathieu BangertSanofi Pasteur, Lyon, France.
You LiCentre for Global Health, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Jean-Sebastien CasalegnoHospices Civils de Lyon; Hôpital de la Croix-Rousse; Centre de Biologie Nord; Institut des Agents Infectieux; Laboratoire de Virologie, Lyon; France.
Saverio CainiNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (Nivel), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
John PagetNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (Nivel), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research · NLSanofi (France) · FRInstitut Mérieux (France) · FRNanjing Medical University · CNUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundThere is currently no standardised approach to estimate respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) epidemics' timing (or seasonality), a critical information for their effective prevention and control.AimWe aimed to provide an overview of methods to define RSV seasonality and identify factors supporting method choice or interpretation/comparison of seasonal estimates.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed and Embase (2016-2021) for studies using quantitative approaches to determine the start and end of RSV epidemics. Studies' features (data-collection purpose, location, regional/(sub)national scope), methods, and assessment characteristics (case definitions, sampled population's age, in/outpatient status, setting, diagnostics) were extracted. Methods were categorised by their need of a denominator (i.e. numbers of specimens tested) and their retrospective vs real-time application. Factors worth considering when choosing methods and assessing seasonal estimates were sought by analysing studies.ResultsWe included 32 articles presenting 49 seasonality estimates (18 thereof through the 10% positivity threshold method). Methods were classified into eight categories, two requiring a denominator (1 retrospective; 1 real-time) and six not (3 retrospective; 3 real-time). A wide range of assessment characteristics was observed. Several studies showed that seasonality estimates varied when methods differed, or data with dissimilar assessment characteristics were employed. Five factors (comprising study purpose, application time, assessment characteristics, healthcare system and policies, and context) were identified that could support method choice and result interpretation.ConclusionMethods and assessment characteristics used to define RSV seasonality are heterogeneous. Our categorisation of methods and proposed framework of factors may assist in choosing RSV seasonality methods and interpretating results.

Indexed as

EpidemicsRespiratory Syncytial Virus, HumanRespiratory Syncytial Virus InfectionsHumansInfantRetrospective StudiesSeasons

Identifiers

PMID38304952
PMCPMC10835753
OpenAlexW4391475068

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.