MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7027602183

Clinical manifestations of human monkeypox infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· article· en· W7027602183 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAnglia Ruskin Research Online (Anglia Ruskin University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChillsmyalgiaLethargyRashConfidence intervalPharyngitisSystematic review
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about the ongoing monkeypox (mpox) outbreak, and the clinical features of mpox in patients worldwide have not been rigorously analysed. Thus, we aimed to investigate the clinical features associated with mpox infection and understand the pathophysiology and characteristics of the disease. For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for articles published till 16 September 2022. We used a random effects model to calculate the pooled prevalence and 95% confidence interval (CI). We used the I2 statistic to assess heterogeneity, Egger's test to assess publication bias, 95% prediction interval to determine the level of uncertainty, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tool to assess the risk of bias. Twenty-six relevant articles from 19 countries across 5 continents were included, and data on 5472 mpox patients with 18 unique features were analysed. The pooled prevalence of clinical features of mpox were rash (85.7%, 95% CI: 68.3–94.3; k = 21), chills (77.8%, 95% CI: 70.5–83.7; k = 3), and fever (62.3%, 95% CI: 51.3–71.6; k = 25), lymphadenopathy (58.6%, 95% CI: 47.2–69.2; k = 21), lethargy or exhaustion (46.8%, 95% CI: 30.7–63.5; k = 14), pruritus (40.6%, 95% CI: 28.5–54.0; k = 5), myalgia (36.0%, 95% CI: 24.3–49.7; k = 16), headache (34.6%, 95% CI: 23.4–47.8; k = 17), skin ulcer (31.1%, 95% CI: 18.6–47.1; k = 7), abdomen symptom (24.2%, 95% CI: 17.9–31.9; k = 11), pharyngitis (23.0%, 95% CI: 12.7–37.9; k = 14), respiratory symptom (19.5%, 95% CI: 6.8–44.6; k = 6), nausea or vomiting (13.0%, 95% CI: 4.6–31.9; k = 3), scrotal or penile oedema (10.7%, 95% CI: 6.3–17.7; k = 4), conjunctivitis (7.1%, 95% CI: 2.4–18.9; k = 6), and death (0.9%, 95% CI: 0.4–2.0; k = 26). This is the first international and comprehensive study to examine all clinical presentations of human mpox infection. Our systematic review proposes a comprehensive understanding of the current mpox outbreak and may serve as key data for future studies on the pathological mechanisms and epidemiology of mpox infections.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.174
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnglia Ruskin Research Online (Anglia Ruskin University)Same topicPoxvirus research and outbreaksFrench-language works237,207