Risk factors associated with human Mpox infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Mpox emerged as a significant global public health concern during the 2022–2023 outbreak, impacting populations in both endemic and non-endemic countries. This study reviews and synthesises evidence on the risk factors associated with human Mpox transmission across these regions. Methods A systematic search of peer-reviewed original studies was conducted across Scopus, Embase, Web of Science and PubMed databases, covering publications up to 31 March 2024. The review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Two authors independently screened the articles by title, abstract and full text. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale used to assess the risk of bias for included articles. Fixed- or random-effects meta-analysis was conducted when at least two studies reported ORs or relative risks, with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed using the <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <m:msup> <m:mrow> <m:mi>I</m:mi> </m:mrow> <m:mrow> <m:mn>2</m:mn> </m:mrow> </m:msup> </m:math> statistic. This study was registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42023459895 ). Results The systematic review identified 947 articles through database searches, of which 31 met our inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant risk factors associated with Mpox infection. Interaction with infected animals (OR=5.61, 95% CI 2.83, 11.13), HIV infection (OR=4.46, 95% CI 3.27, 6.08), other sexually transmitted infections (OR=1.76, 95% CI 1.42, 2.19), unprotected sexual activities (OR=1.53, 95% CI 1.13, 2.07), contact with an infected person (OR=2.39, 95% CI 1.87, 3.05), identification as men who have sex with men (OR=2.18, 95% CI 1.88, 2.51) and having multiple sexual partners (OR=1.61, 95% CI 1.24, 2.09) were associated with increased Mpox infection risk. Conversely, smallpox vaccination was associated with a significantly reduced risk of Mpox infection (OR=0.24, 95% CI 0.11, 0.55). Conclusion Identification of risk factors associated with Mpox provides insights for strategic public health planning, enabling targeted interventions for high-risk groups and optimising resource allocation to strengthen Mpox control efforts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".