ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2025
Comparing diagnostic methods for historical arbovirus outbreaks: Insights from 19th century "dengue" epidemics.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study reexamines historical "dengue" epidemics of the 18th and 19th centuries, suggesting that chikungunya virus (CHIKV), rather than dengue virus (DENV), may have been responsible for many of these outbreaks. While "dengue" was identified as a tropical disease in the 19th century, its exact characteristics remain unclear, and some descriptions align more closely with CHIKV, known for its distinctive symptom of joint pain. Three approaches were used to investigate these historical epidemics: (A) Expert opinion provided a contextualized and comprehensive analysis but faced criticism for its subjective nature (B) Clinical Score Application allowed for greater objectivity and a more stringent diagnosis, although it was limited by the need for a complete description (C) Double Proofreading: Two expert groups independently reviewed the articles, which enhanced objectivity but also led to greater variability in the results. The study suggests that CHIKV was mainly responsible for the epidemics historically attributed to "dengue". It highlights the challenges of diagnosing diseases from historical records. It also raises the possibility that other alphaviruses, like mayaro virus, could be involved, but CHIKV remains the primary candidate. This study offers intriguing insights into pathogen identification in historical epidemics, emphasizing the importance of a combined approach for a more precise understanding of past diseases and their evolution.
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.