SynthesisPLoS neglected tropical diseases2025
A systematic review of the methodological considerations in Campylobacter burden of disease studies.
Synthesis in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCampylobacteriosis is a major zoonotic and foodborne disease (FBD), posing a substantial social and health economic burden on human health. Burden of disease (BoD) studies, which increasingly use the disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) metric, provide comprehensive insights into disease effects. However, the complexity of DALY calculations, combined with diverse causative agents and research gaps, complicates cross-regional comparisons. This review evaluates existing Campylobacter BoD studies and interrogates their methodological approaches and assumptions in quantifying DALYs. METHODS/PRINCIPAL
findingsA systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and selected grey literature databases was conducted to identify existing Campylobacter BoD studies. Studies assessing the BoD methodology and calculation using the DALY framework were considered. In total, 23 studies met the predefined inclusion criteria. Of these, 19 were single-country studies, while 4 were multi-country analyses. A significant data gap exists, with limited or no studies from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), exemplified by just one study obtained from Rwanda. Most studies used an incidence- and pathogen-based approach to estimate DALYs, excluding social weighting, in line with the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study. Methodological discrepancies were noted, especially in disability weight (DW) assignment, health state classification, and life expectancy table usage. Most single-country studies (n=8) used national life tables rather than universal ones, challenging cross-country comparisons due to a lack of standardisation.
conclusionSignificant variations in the methodological approaches and assumptions for Campylobacter BoD studies exist. Addressing these disparities is essential for harmonising methodological design choices using the DALYs metric to inform evidence-based public health policies and interventions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: The protocol for this study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), which can be accessed under the registration number CRD42023414973.
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.