ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2024
Acute
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retrospective Analysis of Chronic Q Fever Cases at a Tertiary Care Center From 2007 to 2023.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Beyond Acute Infection: A Conceptual Framework Linking Zoonotic Bacterial Pathogens to Pulmonary Fibrosis and Lung Carcinogenesis.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Acute Q Fever After Diabetic Ketoacidosis Correction: Repeated Blood Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing and Antimicrobial De-Escalation.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Acute Q Fever in an Elderly Traveler with Multiple Comorbidities Diagnosed by Blood mNGS and Resolved with Omadacycline.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Review
- Hydroxychloroquine's diverse targets: a new frontier in precision medicine.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Navigating Q fever: Current perspectives and challenges in outbreak preparedness.Open veterinary journal · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Identifying and treating patients with acute Q fever who are at an increased risk of progressing to persistent disease is crucial for preventing future complications. In this study, we share our decade-long clinical experience with acute Q fever, highlighting the challenges that clinicians encounter from making an initial diagnosis and performing risk stratification to determining the appropriate prophylaxis regimen and duration. Methods: We retrieved records of adult Mayo Clinic patients (≥18 years) with positive Results: Thirty-one patients were included. Their median age was 58 years (IQR, 50-64), and the majority were men (84%). Acute hepatitis (29%), flu-like illness (25.8%), and pneumonia (16%) were the most common presentations. Thirteen patients (42%) received antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent disease progression, with significant variation in the indications and duration across physicians. The combination of doxycycline and hydroxychloroquine was the preferred regimen. Prophylaxis was administered for a median 333 days (IQR, 168-414). Four patients (13%) progressed to Q fever native valve infective endocarditis, with elevated anticardiolipin immunoglobulin G levels being the sole risk factor in 2 cases. The small sample size precluded drawing conclusions on the impact of prophylaxis in preventing disease progression. Conclusions: Management of acute Q fever is complicated by the lack of comprehensive clinical guidelines leading to varied clinical practices. There is a critical need for randomized trials to establish robust evidence-based protocols for management.
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.