Estimating the proportion of clinically suspected cholera cases that are true Vibrio cholerae infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Wiens Kirsten E.ORCID,Xu HanmengORCID,Zou KaiyueORCID,Mwaba John,Lessler JustinORCID,Malembaka Espoir BwengeORCID,Demby Maya N.,Bwire GodfreyORCID,Qadri FirdausiORCID,Lee Elizabeth C.ORCID,Azman Andrew S.ORCID

Abstract

Background Cholera surveillance relies on clinical diagnosis of acute watery diarrhea. Suspected cholera case definitions have high sensitivity but low specificity, challenging our ability to characterize cholera burden and epidemiology. Our objective was to estimate the proportion of clinically suspected cholera that are true Vibrio cholerae infections and identify factors that explain variation in positivity. Methods and findings We conducted a systematic review of studies that tested ≥10 suspected cholera cases for V. cholerae O1/O139 using culture, PCR, and/or a rapid diagnostic test. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar for studies that sampled at least one suspected case between January 1, 2000 and April 19, 2023, to reflect contemporary patterns in V. cholerae positivity. We estimated diagnostic test sensitivity and specificity using a latent class meta-analysis. We estimated V. cholerae positivity using a random-effects meta-analysis, adjusting for test performance. We included 119 studies from 30 countries. V. cholerae positivity was lower in studies with representative sampling and in studies that set minimum ages in suspected case definitions. After adjusting for test performance, on average, 52% (95% credible interval (CrI): 24%, 80%) of suspected cases represented true V. cholerae infections. After adjusting for test performance and study methodology, the odds of a suspected case having a true infection were 5.71 (odds ratio 95% CrI: 1.53, 15.43) times higher when surveillance was initiated in response to an outbreak than in non-outbreak settings. Variation across studies was high, and a limitation of our approach was that we were unable to explain all the heterogeneity with study-level attributes, including diagnostic test used, setting, and case definitions. Conclusions In this study, we found that burden estimates based on suspected cases alone may overestimate the incidence of medically attended cholera by 2-fold. However, accounting for cases missed by traditional clinical surveillance is key to unbiased cholera burden estimates. Given the substantial variability in positivity between settings, extrapolations from suspected to confirmed cases, which is necessary to estimate cholera incidence rates without exhaustive testing, should be based on local data.

Funder

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease

Publisher

Public Library of Science (PLoS)

Subject

General Medicine

Reference147 articles.

1. Updated global burden of cholera in endemic countries.;M Ali;PLoS Negl Trop Dis,2015

2. Mapping the burden of cholera in sub-Saharan Africa and implications for control: an analysis of data across geographical scales;J Lessler;Lancet,2018

3. Vibrio cholerae O1 transmission in Bangladesh: insights from a nationally representative serosurvey;AS Azman;Lancet Microbe,2020

4. A serological survey for cholera antibodies in rural East Pakistan;WH Mosley;Bull World Health Organ,1968

5. Bacterial shedding in household contacts of cholera patients in Dhaka;AA Weil;Bangladesh Am J Trop Med Hyg,2014

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3