MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4401836076 · doi:10.1101/2024.08.14.24311975

Risk Factors of Human Mpox (Monkeypox) Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2024· review· en· W4401836076 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Chigozie Louisa J. Ugwu, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi, Jude Dzevela Kong, Ali Asgary, James Orbinski, Woldegebriel Assefa Woldegerima

Notice bibliographique

RevuemedRxiv · 2024
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineImmunology and Microbiology
ThématiquePoxvirus research and outbreaks
Établissements canadiensCentre for Global Health ResearchResponse Biomedical (Canada)York University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMeta-analysisMonkeypoxOdds ratioSystematic reviewMedicineRelative riskConfidence intervalEpidemiologyDemographyMEDLINEFamily medicineInternal medicineBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Mpox (formerly Monkeypox) virus has affected the lives of thousands of individuals both in endemic and non-endemic countries. Before the May 2022 outbreak, Mpox infections were sporadically endemic in Central and Western Africa, still research into Mpox has been limited and lacking epidemiological data. Thus, identification of potential risk factors to better understand who is at risk of being infected is critical for future prevention and control. Objective To synthesize comprehensive evidence on risk factors associated with human Mpox transmission both in endemic and non-endemic countries from inception to March 31, 2024. Methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed in conducting the systematic review. Electronic databases were searched. Two reviewers sifted the articles that were included in the review: firstly, by title and abstract, and secondly, by full text. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) to assess the risk of bias for included articles. Fixed or random effects meta-analysis were conducted when at least two studies reported odds ratios (OR), relative risks (RR), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic and sensitivity analysis was also done. The study protocol has been registered under PROSPERO with ID: CRD42023459895 . Results 947 articles were identified from the database search and 31 articles were eligible to be included in the systematic review. The findings of the meta-analysis showed that interaction with infected animals ( OR = 5.61, 95% CI = 2.83, 11.13), HIV ( OR = 4.46, 95% CI = 3.27, 6.08), other STIs ( OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.42, 2.91), sexual contact/activities (OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.13, 4.82), contact with an infected person (OR = 2.39, 95%CI = 1.87, 3.05), being identified as men who have sex with men (MSM) (OR = 2.18, 95%CI = 1.88, 2.51), and having multiple sexual partners Mpox (OR = 1.61, 95%CI = 1.24, 2.09), were associated with an increased risk of contracting Mpox. However, patients who were vaccinated against smallpox had a lower risk of Mpox infection (OR = 0.24, 95%CI = 0.11, 0.55). Conclusion This study is the first meta-analysis on reported risk factors for Mpox. Our analysis demonstrated that certain factors were associated with increased risk of Mpox, whereas smallpox vaccination had a protective role against contracting Mpox. The study findings could facilitate future strategic public health planning and targeted intervention. Key messages of this article What is already known on this topic Mpox (monkeypox) is a zoonotic infectious disease of notable global public health importance due to recent outbreaks in non-endemic countries. Prior outbreaks of Mpox have been associated with travel to endemic areas in Western and Central Africa, contact with infected animals, and close contact with infectious lesions, particularly among household members. What this study adds This study is the first meta-analysis on reported risk factors for Mpox. Our study findings add to the body of evidence on Mpox research efforts and could assist in future Mpox global strategic intervention and control. Our meta-analysis revealed a strong correlation between increased risk of Mpox infection, HVI, other STIs, physical and sexual contacts, and being identified as MSM. While HIV infection may be a risk factor for Mpox, Mpox lesions could also facilitate the transmission of HIV and other STIs. How this study might affect research, practice or policy The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis provide evidence to support policymakers in future Mpox intervention and prevention in both endemic and non-endemic countries based on identified risk factors.

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.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,015
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens large)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Méta-analyse · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,976
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,078

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0150,044
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0030,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0240,037
Bibliométrie0,0080,010
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0040,002
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,101
Tête enseignante GPT0,377
Écart entre enseignants0,276 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeMéta-analyse
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2024
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuemedRxivMême sujetPoxvirus research and outbreaksTravaux en français237 207