ArticleBMJ public health2025
Severe infection incidence among young infants in Dhaka, Bangladesh: an observational cohort study.
Article in BMJ public health, 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.
- Development of a prediction model for infant hospitalisation and death using clinical features assessed by community health workers during routine postnatal home visits in Dhaka, Bangladesh.BMJ paediatrics open · 2026Article
- Neonatal faecal abundance ofGut microbiome (Cambridge, England) · 2026Article
- Severe infection incidence among young infants in Dhaka, Bangladesh: an observational cohort study.BMJ public health · 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
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
abstractIntroduction: Heterogeneity in definitions of severe infection, sepsis and serious bacterial infection (SBI) in infants limits the comparability of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of infection prevention interventions. To inform the design of infection prevention RCTs for infants in low-resource settings, we estimated the incidence of severe infection and death among Bangladeshi infants aged 0-60 days using variations in case definitions. Methods: Among 1939 infants born generally healthy in Dhaka, Bangladesh, severe infection was identified through up to 12 scheduled community health worker home visits from 0 to 60 days of age or through caregiver self-referral. The primary severe infection case definition combined physician documentation of standardised clinical signs and/or diagnosis of sepsis/SBI, plus either a positive blood culture or parenteral antibiotic treatment for ≥5 days. Incidence rates were estimated for the primary severe infection definition, the WHO definition of possible SBI, blood culture-confirmed infection and five alternative definitions including non-injury death. Results: Severe infection incidence per 1000 infant-days was 1.2 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.4) using the primary definition, 0.84 (0.69 to 1.0) using the WHO definition of possible SBI, 0.026 (0.0085 to 0.081) using blood culture-confirmed infection and 0.061 (0.029 to 0.13) for death. One-third of cases met criteria for the primary severe infection definition through physician diagnosis of sepsis/SBI rather than the standardised clinical signs, and 85% of cases were identified following caregiver self-referral despite frequent scheduled visits. Conclusions: Severe infection incidence in infants varied considerably by case definition. Using a clinical sign-based definition may miss a substantial proportion of cases identified by physician diagnosis of sepsis/SBI. A consensus definition of severe infection in infants that balances permissiveness and stringency and can be operationalised in low-resource countries would improve the comparability of RCTs. If health facilities are accessible and caregivers readily seek care for infant illness, frequently scheduled home assessments may not be necessary.
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.