Epidemiological trends and clinical features of the ongoing monkeypox epidemic: A preliminary pooled data analysis and literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An emerging outbreak of monkeypox infection is quickly spreading worldwide, being currently reported in more than 30 countries, with slightly less than 1000 cases. In the present preliminary report, we collected and synthesized early data concerning epidemiological trends and clinical features of the ongoing outbreak and we compared them with those of previous outbreaks. Data were pooled from six clusters in Italy, Australia, the Czech Republic, Portugal, and the United Kingdom, totaling 124 cases (for 35 of which it was possible to retrieve detailed information). The ongoing epidemic differs from previous outbreaks in terms of age (54.29% of individuals in their thirties), sex/gender (most cases being males), risk factors, and transmission route, with sexual transmission being highly likely. Also, the clinical presentation is atypical and unusual, being characterized by anogenital lesions and rashes that relatively spare the face and extremities. The most prevalent sign/symptom reported was fever (in 54.29% of cases) followed by inguinal lymphadenopathy (45.71%) and exanthema (40.00%). Asthenia, fatigue, and headache were described in 22.86% and 25.71% of the subjects, respectively. Myalgia was present in 17.14% of the cases. Both genital and anal lesions (ulcers and vesicles) were reported in 31.43% of the cases. Finally, cervical lymphadenopathy was described in 11.43% of the sample, while the least commonly reported symptoms were diarrhea and axillary lymphadenopathy (5.71% of the case series for both symptoms). Some preliminary risk factors can be identified (being a young male, having sex with other men, engaging in risky behaviors and activities, including condomless sex, human immunodeficiency virus positivity (54.29% of the sample analyzed), and a story of previous sexually transmitted infections, including syphilis). On the other hand, being fully virally suppressed and undetectable may protect against a more severe infectious course. However, further research in the field is urgently needed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.030 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".