PREVALENCE OF CYTOMEGALOVIRUS INFECTION IN INFANTS IN IRAN: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background & Aims: Cytomegalovirus is one of the most significant causes of infection in infants, leading to congenital disabilities, developmental disabilities, hearing loss, and even death.This study aimed to determine the prevalence of cytomegalovirus infection among infants in Iran through a systematic review and meta-analysis.Materials & Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, Scientific Information Database, as well as Magiran electronic databases were searched to find relevant articles published up to September 2024.A hand search was also conducted on primary review sources and key studies.The languages of the studies were limited to Persian and English.Bias assessment of the studies was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale checklist.Data analysis was conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 3. Results: A total of 15 observational studies, including 5889 infants were included in the analysis.The results of the meta-analysis showed that the prevalence of cytomegalovirus in infants was 3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.01-0.10;P < 0.05).Additionally, the prevalence of cytomegalovirus in male and female infants was 2% (95% CI: 0.004-0.10;P < 0.05) and 3% (95% CI: 0.007-0.16;P < 0.05), respectively.No statistically significant relationship was observed between the prevalence of cytomegalovirus in infants and the year of publication of the studies (P > 0.05).However, a statistically significant relationship was observed between the prevalence of cytomegalovirus in infants and the sample size of the studies (P < 0.05).Publication bias was noted in the study (P < 0.05). Conclusion:The findings showed that cytomegalovirus prevalence is high in infants, and comprehensive surveillance programs are necessary for the effective management and prevention of cytomegalovirus infections in infants.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".