↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of the importance of fever with respect to dengue prognosis according to the 2009 WHO classification: a retrospective study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of the importance of fever with respect to dengue prognosis according to the 2009 WHO classification: a retrospective study
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-2128-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline Tukasan, Nathália Barbosa Furlan, Cássia Fernanda Estofolete, Maurício Lacerda Nogueira, Natal Santos da Silva

Abstract

The 2009 revised World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for dengue describe fever as the core symptom. Accordingly, the diagnosis of non-febrile patients is complicated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the importance of fever in patients with dengue according to the 2009 revised WHO classification. In this study, we assessed 30,670 dengue cases using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, detection of the non-structural protein 1, or polymerase chain reaction for diagnostic confirmation. Fisher's exact test was used to evaluate associations between fever and related clinical manifestations. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to assess the association of dengue classification with fever and time to treatment. The effects of fever and time to treatment on the risk of progression were analyzed using an ordinal logistic regression to stereotype the model. Disease classification was found to associate significantly with both fever and time to treatment (both P < 0.001). Non-febrile patients were nearly four-fold more likely to exhibit "dengue without warning signs" than "severe dengue" (odds ratio [OR] = 3.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.20-4.36). Patients who received treatment within 7 days were twice as likely to have "dengue without warning signs" as opposed to "severe dengue" when compared to those who waited >7 days (OR = 2.23; 95% CI: 1.78-2.80). However, this difference was negligible in the multivariate analysis (OR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.98-1.07). Fever is a risk factor for disease progression in patients with dengue. However, non-febrile patients should not be neglected because this may delay treatment and could lead to more severe disease.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 73 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 19%
Student > Master 11 15%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 20 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 11%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 22 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 January 2017.
All research outputs
#4,202,008
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,355
of 7,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,537
of 421,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#39
of 176 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,698 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,125 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 176 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.