ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Test-adjusted estimation for pertussis incidence in greater Toronto, Canada, 1993-2006.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPertussis remains a major public health concern, particularly affecting young children. While most identified cases occur in this group, the burden among older children and adults who undergo less frequent testing is not well characterized.
methodsWe analyzed pertussis testing and case data in the Greater Toronto Area from 1993 to 2006. We applied a meta-regression-based method for test adjustment by age and sex, estimating case counts in each demographic group as if they were tested at the same rate as the most tested group (< 1-year males).
resultsBefore adjustment, incidence was highest in the < 1-year group and declined with age, with the ≥ 80-year group having an incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 0.011 (95% CI: 0.006-0.020) relative to male children aged < 1 year. After adjustment, the 2-4-year group showed the highest relative incidence (IRR: 5.503, 95% CI: 2.121-14.281). The highest estimated underdiagnosed case rates were in the 2-4-year group at 13.69 per diagnosed case in males (95% CI: 5.913-21.467) and the 10-19-age group in females at 6.80 per diagnosed case (95% CI: 4.684-8.917).
conclusionOur use of a novel test-adjustment method for estimating incidence suggests that while pertussis is most diagnosed in infants, it is substantially underdiagnosed in older age groups generally, but particularly so in preschool-aged children and the elderly. As undiagnosed infection in these populations may play a key role in sustaining transmission, this finding has implications for vaccine booster policy. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable (not a clinical trial).
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.