ArticlePloS one2025
Trends and cross-country inequalities in dengue, 1990-2021.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hybrid Feature Selection-Based Machine Learning and Deep Learning Framework for Biomarker Prediction From RNA-seq Data During Dengue Fever to Severe Dengue Progression.Evolutionary bioinformatics online · 2026Article
- Spatial Risk Factors of Vector-Borne Diseases in Pacific Island Countries and Territories: A Scoping Review.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Review
- High prevalence of dengue with warning signs but absence of severe cases in Vietnamese pediatric patients: an analysis of predictive factors.Le infezioni in medicina · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe existing body of literature is deficient in the most recent data regarding the global perspective of dengue fever and its associated health inequities.Our aim is to assess the global burden of dengue fever and its health inequities from 1990 to 2021.
methodsThe Global Burden of Disease (GBD) database, organized by global health research institutions, is a comprehensive database and the largest-scale and most detailed scientific research to date. We utilized the GBD database for epidemiological trends, demographic analysis, epidemiological decomposition, cross-national inequality and predictive modeling for the global dengue burden up to 2051 were also performed.
resultsGlobally, dengue fever incidence, prevalence, Disability-Adjusted Life-Years (DALYs), and mortality have risen with marked international disparities. From 1990 to 2021, Age-Standardized Rates (ASRs) for incidence and prevalence rose by 1.83% (95% CI: 1.58%-2.08%), and for DALYs and mortality by 1.33% (95% CI: 1.10%-1.57%) and 1.70% (95% CI: 1.45%-1.94%), respectively. Age-Period-Cohort (APC) model analysis showed a positive link between dengue fever incidence and age, with mortality spiking in those over 80. DALYs burden decomposition highlighted population growth as the key driver of global burden, yet impacts differed across Socio-Demographic Index (SDI) quintiles. Dengue fever burden inequalities related to SDI have remained, with benefits shifting from poor to rich populations. Bayesian Age-Period-Cohort (BAPC) model projections indicate stable incidence and prevalence ASRs, but declining DALYs and mortality ASRs, especially for females.
conclusionThis study elucidates the changes in the burden of dengue fever against the backdrop of a burgeoning global population, severe aging, and pronounced health inequities across nations, quantifying these alterations and forecasting the trends in the disease burden over the next three decades. Concurrently, the research proposes effective measures for various countries and regions to mitigate health inequities.
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.