Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42745311›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026

An in-depth comparison: first wave of mpox in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and Lisbon, Portugal.

Raffaele Junior Aliberti, Mayara Secco Torres da Silva, Valdiléa Gonçalves Veloso, Beatriz Grinsztejn, Rosa Maria Figueiredo Teodósio, Mayumi Duarte Wakimoto

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Raffaele Junior AlibertiInstituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical, IHMT, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, UNL, Rua da Junqueira 100, Lisboa, 1349-008, Portugal. raffaelejunior.aliberti@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9526-9325
Mayara Secco Torres da SilvaInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fiocruz, Av. Brasil, Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, 4365, Brazil.
Valdiléa Gonçalves VelosoInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fiocruz, Av. Brasil, Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, 4365, Brazil.
Beatriz GrinsztejnInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fiocruz, Av. Brasil, Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, 4365, Brazil.
Rosa Maria Figueiredo TeodósioInstituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical, IHMT, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, UNL, Rua da Junqueira 100, Lisboa, 1349-008, Portugal.
Mayumi Duarte WakimotoInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fiocruz, Av. Brasil, Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, 4365, Brazil. mayumi.wakimoto@ini.fiocruz.br.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 2022 mpox outbreak spread rapidly beyond endemic regions, affecting multiple countries with broadly similar transmission patterns but different public health responses and surveillance systems. We compared laboratory-confirmed mpox infections reported during the first epidemic wave in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and Lisbon, Portugal, with particular attention to demographic characteristics, clinical presentation, transmission patterns, hospitalization, and the role of HIV status.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of routinely collected, deidentified surveillance data from national notification systems in Brazil and Portugal. Adults with laboratory-confirmed mpox reported between May and December 2022 were included. Variables were harmonized across datasets, and missing data were retained without imputation. Descriptive analyses were performed by city and HIV status. Group comparisons used Pearson's chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, Mann-Whitney U test, and two proportion Z tests, as appropriate. Data completeness was also explored.

resultsA total of 1,614 individuals were included: 960 from Rio de Janeiro and 654 from Lisbon. Mean age was similar in both cities (34.5 vs 34.9 years), but Lisbon had a higher proportion of males (99.4% vs 93.0%). The epidemic curves showed a similar rise-and-decline pattern, with an earlier peak in Lisbon (June 2022) and a later peak in Rio de Janeiro (August 2022). Skin or mucosal lesions were the most frequently reported manifestation in both settings, affecting more than 85% of individuals. Fever was reported more often in Rio de Janeiro, whereas adenopathy and asthenia were more commonly recorded in Lisbon. Within each city, symptom profiles were not significantly different between people living with HIV and those not living with HIV. Hospitalization rates were low overall in both cities (5.7% in Rio de Janeiro and 5.4% in Lisbon), although people living with HIV in Rio de Janeiro had higher odds of hospitalization than those without HIV. Data completeness was generally better in Rio de Janeiro than in Lisbon.

conclusionsRio de Janeiro and Lisbon experienced similarly shaped first wave mpox epidemics, despite differences in timing, surveillance completeness, and health system context. HIV status did not appear to meaningfully modify acute clinical presentation, while hospitalization risk may have been influenced by differences in immune status and care pathways. These findings highlight the importance of harmonized, high-quality surveillance to support more accurate cross-country comparisons and better targeted public health responses.

Indexed as

Disease OutbreaksMpox, MonkeypoxAdolescentAdultBrazilFemaleHIV InfectionsHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedPortugalRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultBrazilClinical presentationComparative epidemiologyDisease surveillanceHospitalizationMpoxPeople with HIVPortugal

Identifiers

PMID42745311
PMCPMC13579871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.