Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38868311›Full record

ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2024

Acute

Said El Zein, Doug W Challener, Nischal Ranganath, Ryan B Khodadadi, Elitza S Theel, Omar M Abu Saleh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
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.

Said El ZeinDivision of Public Health, Infectious Diseases and Occupational Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4331-5259
Doug W ChallenerDivision of Public Health, Infectious Diseases and Occupational Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Nischal RanganathDivision of Public Health, Infectious Diseases and Occupational Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9538-6214
Ryan B KhodadadiDivision of Public Health, Infectious Diseases and Occupational Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Elitza S TheelDivision of Clinical Microbiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6886-2294
Omar M Abu SalehDivision of Public Health, Infectious Diseases and Occupational Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4955-5544

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

acute Q feveranticardiolipinCoxiella burnetiidiagnosishydroxychloroquinetreatment

Identifiers

PMID38868311
PMCPMC11167673

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.