Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40393433›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2025

Malaria Influenced Outcomes of Yorktown Sieges: 1781 and 1862.

G Dennis Shanks

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

G Dennis ShanksAustralian Defence Force Malaria and Infectious Disease Institute, Enoggera, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During two critically important battles on the Yorktown peninsula in Virginia in 1781, during the American Revolutionary War and in 1862 during the US Civil War, malaria played a vital role in determining how many soldiers were fit to fight. Lord Cornwallis' British Army was besieged by a Franco-American Army under Washington and forced to surrender when the Royal Navy could not relieve them. At the time of the October capitulation, most British soldiers were sick from fevers probably due to malaria whereas less than 8% of American soldiers were ill. This differential disease effect was likely due to lower exposure and partial immunity in the Americans. A very different military campaign in the same area was also disrupted by malaria more than 80 years later during the US Civil War. General McClellan failed in his attempt to capture the rebel capital at Richmond when forced to camp in the swamps of the Chickahominy River by Confederate defensive works leading to a malaria epidemic in summer 1862. Disease did not solely determine the military outcome, but malaria strongly influenced how many soldiers could be maintained in a field army. Malaria remains capable of causing mass casualties in deployed military forces.

Indexed as

MalariaMilitary PersonnelAmerican Civil WarAmerican RevolutionHumansVirginia

Identifiers

PMID40393433
PMCPMC12360084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.