ArticleScientific reports2025
Insights into leprosy epidemiology from an isolated population located in the Brazilian Amazon.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Lewis Y (LeImmunologic research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Leprosy, a chronic infectious disease caused mainly by Mycobacterium leprae (M. leprae), is still an important public health problem in countries such as Brazil and India. Here, we estimate key epidemiological parameters in the Prata Village, a unique, hyper-endemic, former leprosy colony isolated in the Brazilian Amazon. This is a population-based study in which the entire Prata Village population has been enrolled. Clinical, socioeconomic, and demographic data were obtained and validated by cross-checking using three independent information sources. Validated data was used for descriptive epidemiological analysis. From a total of 2,005 inhabitants by the time of the enrollment, 1,084 (56.2%) were born in the Village and, therefore, likely under lifelong exposure to leprosy cases. We observed differences between the sub-populations born and not born in the village in the cumulative prevalence of leprosy (5.9% vs. 22.9%, respectively) and the median age at diagnosis (15 years vs. 28 years, respectively). In contrast, there was no difference in the distribution of cases between males and females. Although extrapolating our findings to more open populations must be done carefully, we believe we used a unique population as a model to provide additional insights into the epidemiology of leprosy.
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.