ArticleCommunications medicine2024
Mpox virus infection in women and outbreak sex disparities: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in Communications medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Atypical mucocutaneous manifestations of MPOX: A systematic review.The Journal of dermatology · 2025Pooled it
- Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of Peruvian patients with mpox: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Immune profiling of mpox survivors reveals divergent durability of antibody and T cell responses.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Mathematical modelling and time series clustering of Mpox outbreak: A comparative study of the top 10 affected countries and implications for future outbreak management.Global epidemiology · 2025Article
- Mpox virus: virology, molecular epidemiology, and global public health challenges.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the recent literature indicates that mpox (monkeypox) primarily affects men, there are also multiple reports in women. Estimates of the sex distribution of mpox patients and patterns will enable a better understanding of the ongoing mpox outbreak.
methodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, seven databases were searched for studies published in English up to January 4
resultsHere we screened 470 articles and included 60 studies for qualitative synthesis. 42 studies with 3125 women out of 47,407 confirmed cases were found suitable for meta-analysis. The pooled proportion of female patients is 17.22% (95% CI: 10.49-25.11; I
conclusionsThere is considerable caseload (17.22%) amongst women, which must be seen in the context of a much higher proportion (44.09%) in studies prior to 2022 compared to 2.40% in the 2022 outbreak indicating an epidemiological shift. Data on disease characteristics among women with mpox disease are scarce. Further studies should focus on these aspects to better understand the disease in women and empower epidemiologists and clinicians to make evidence-based decisions for this vulnerable group.
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.