ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2024
A sequential study of Chikungunya fever cases notified in the urban setup of India.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Chikungunya's resurgence highlights reporting and awareness challenges. Aims: To analyze trends in 170 laboratory-confirmed Chikungunya cases in Urban Surat's Central Sentinel Surveillance (2016-2020), supplemented by a subset (n = 30) examining perceptions, attitudes, and risk reduction practices based on notification level. Results: Notification rates peaked in 2017 (1.14 cases/100,000). A high House Index (>1) was observed in 59% (2018) and 58% (2019) of cases. Seasonal peaks occurred in November (31%) and December (24.7%), with no private sector notifications. Highest case rates were in South (9.2) and Southeast (8.1) zones. Over half of the cases in Central (69.2%), Southeast (67.2%), and South (52.8%) zones had a House Index >1 ( Conclusion: Fluctuating notifications and unnoticed surges in 2019-2020 underscore the need for continuous, standardized surveillance. Higher case rates in southern and central regions were linked to high indoor breeding. The lack of private sector reporting and underreporting indicate a need for integrated surveillance. Awareness and adoption of
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.