ArticleInfluenza and other respiratory viruses2026
Evaluating Analytic Approaches to Determining Respiratory Syncytial Virus Seasonality-United States, 2014-2024.
Article in Influenza and other respiratory viruses, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRespiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a major cause of hospitalizations among infants and older adults in the United States. Determining RSV seasonality, which varies geographically, is essential to the timely administration of prevention products. We described how a laboratory percent positivity threshold (3% threshold) performs compared to the retrospective slope 10 (RS10) and 10-fold baseline (10FB) methods in defining RSV epidemics across regions.
methodsWe analyzed RSV laboratory testing data submitted by consistent reporters to the National Respiratory and Enteric Virus Surveillance System during July 2014-June 2024. We compared the timing of epidemics, season duration, and percent of annual detections captured within the epidemic period determined from the 3% threshold, RS10, and 10FB methods.
resultsThe epidemic onset weeks determined by the 3% threshold were typically later than those identified by RS10 and varied by region when compared to 10FB. Epidemic duration was shortest with the 3% threshold and longest with RS10. RS10 captured the highest percentage of detections and varied least annually. The 3% threshold and 10FB demonstrated similar percentages of detections before the COVID-19 pandemic, but detections decreased with 10FB postpandemic.
conclusionsRS10 demonstrated high coverage of annual RSV detections and identified earlier onsets but can only be applied retrospectively. 10FB did not consistently identify season onset earlier across regions. Similar evaluation results across the three methods suggest that the 3% threshold was not impacted in determining RSV seasonality postpandemic and is a preferred US method due to its simplicity and application in near real-time.
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.