ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024
"What's in a name?": Using mpox as a case study to understand the importance of communication, advocacy, and information accuracy in disease nomenclature.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Historically, many diseases have been named after the species or location of discovery, the discovering scientists, or the most impacted population. However, species-specific disease names often misrepresent the true reservoir; location-based disease names are frequently targeted with xenophobia; some of the discovering scientists have darker histories; and impacted populations have been stigmatized for this association. Acknowledging these concerns, the World Health Organization now proposes naming diseases after their causative pathogen or symptomatology. Recently, this guidance has been retrospectively applied to a disease at the center of an outbreak rife with stigmatization and misinformation: mpox (f.k.a. 'monkeypox'). This disease, historically endemic to west and central Africa, has prompted racist remarks as it spread globally in 2022 in an epidemic ongoing today. Moreover, its elevated prevalence among men who have sex with men has yielded increased stigma against the LGBTQ+ community. To address these prejudicial associations, 'monkeypox' was renamed 'mpox' in November 2022. We used publicly available data from Google Search Trends to determine which countries were quicker to adopt this name change-and understand factors that limit or facilitate its use. Specifically, we built regression models to quantify the relationship between 'mpox' search intensity in a given country and the country's type of political regime, robustness of sociopolitical and health systems, level of pandemic preparedness, extent of gender and educational inequalities, and temporal evolution of mpox cases through December 2023. Our results suggest that, when compared to 'monkeypox' search intensity, 'mpox' search intensity was significantly higher in countries with any history of mpox outbreaks or higher levels of LGBTQ+ acceptance; meanwhile, 'mpox' search intensity was significantly lower in countries governed by leaders who had recently propagated infectious disease misinformation. Among infectious diseases with stigmatizing names, mpox is among the first to be revised retrospectively. While the adoption of a given disease name will be context-specific-depending in part on its origins and the affected subpopulations-our study provides generalizable insights, applicable to future changes in disease nomenclature.
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.