ArticleEpidemics2026
Seroresponse to repeated infections with Salmonella enterica Typhi and Paratyphi A.
Article in Epidemics, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Enteric fever, a systematic bacterial infection caused by Salmonella Typhi and Paratyphi, continues to impose a significant public health burden in low and middle-income countries, yet our understanding of the serum antibody dynamics following infection remains incomplete. Although previous work has characterized the longitudinal seroresponses following acute typhoid infection, gaps persist in deciphering how repeated exposures influence antibody decay and protection. In our longitudinal cohort study of blood culture-confirmed enteric fever cases enrolled in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Pakistan, we identified several instances of suspected re-infection defined by an initial decline followed by a subsequent rise in antibody levels. The presence of re-infection events interferes with the estimation of antibody decay dynamics and influences the interpretation of seroepidemiological data at the population level. To study the seroresponses to subsequent infections we employed a synthetic within-host model that accounts for elevated baseline antibody levels at time of infection. Compared to the first seroresponse, second or later responses appear to have similar decay rates. As peak levels depend on the time between infections, a new model-derived metric is proposed that does not depend on time since the most recent infection: the minimum baseline antibody level at infection resulting in a small jump (protective) seroconversion. After infection the time to reach the minimum baseline level increases about tenfold. Finally, we show how ignoring variation in subsequent seroresponses into seroincidence estimates leads to bias in population-level infection rates. These findings underscore the importance of accounting for re-infection in seroepidemiological studies and provide refined metrics for interpreting antibody responses, with critical implications for assessing disease burden and guiding public health strategies in endemic regions.
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.