Meningococcal serogroups and surveillance: a systematic review and survey
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Meningococcal disease continues to be a global public health concern due to its epidemic potential, severity, and sequelae. The global epidemiological data on circulating meningococcal serogroups have never been reviewed concurrently with the laboratory capacity for meningococcal surveillance at the national level. We, therefore, aimed to conduct a country-level review of meningococcal surveillance, serogroup distribution, and vaccine use. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review across six databases to identify studies (published January 1, 2010 to October 16, 2017) and grey literature reporting meningococcal serogroup data for the years 2010-2016. We performed independent random effects meta-analyses for serogroups A, B, C, W, X, Y, and other. We developed and circulated a questionnaire-based survey to surveillance focal points in countries (N = 95) with known regional bacterial meningitis surveillance programs to assess their surveillance capacity and summarized using descriptive methods. RESULTS: We included 173 studies from 59 countries in the final analysis. The distribution of meningococcal serogroups differed markedly between countries and regions. Meningococcal serogroups C and W accounted for substantial proportions of meningococcal disease in most of Africa and Latin America. Serogroup B was the predominant cause of meningococcal disease in many locations in Europe, the Americas, and the Western Pacific. Serogroup Y also caused many cases of meningococcal disease in these regions, particularly in Nordic countries. Survey responses were received from 51 countries. All countries reported the ability to confirm the pathogen in-country, while approximately 30% either relied on reference laboratories for serogrouping (N = 10) or did not serogroup specimens (N = 5). Approximately half of countries did not utilize active laboratory-based surveillance system (N = 22). Nationwide use of a meningococcal vaccine varied, but most countries (N = 36) utilized a meningococcal vaccine at least for certain high-risk population groups, in private care, or during outbreaks. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the large geographical variations in circulating meningococcal serogroups, each country should continue to be monitored for changes in major disease-causing serogroups in order to inform vaccine and control policies. Similarly, laboratory capacity should be appropriately scaled up to more accurately understand local epidemiology and disease burden, as well as the impact of vaccination programs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle