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 I 2 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 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 | 0.019 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.045 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".