Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36077910›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

Monkeypox: Some Keys to Understand This Emerging Disease.

Esperanza Gomez-Lucia

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Stigmatizing Monkeypox and COVID-19: A Comparative Framing Study ofInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Esperanza Gomez-LuciaDepartment of Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5261-0586

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 1958, several monkeys in a Copenhagen laboratory developed a skin rash from which an orthopoxvirus could be isolated, which was named monkeypox virus (MPXV). However, the natural animal reservoir for MPXV is thought to be a rodent. The first human case occurred in 1970, and the incidence has increased progressively throughout the years. Starting May 2022, the number of cases outside Africa has soared, especially in Western Europe. There are two clades of MPXV, Congo Basin, with higher virulence and mortality, and Western Africa (WA). MPXV from the present outbreak has been proposed to be classified as Clade 3, distinct from the WA clade by at least 50 substitutions, which may increase human-to-human transmissibility. Most cases correspond to men in their 30s who have sex with men, and the possibility of sexual transmission is under investigation. Though there is no evidence of human-to-animal transmission, pets of positive human cases may be classified as low risk, including dogs, cats, and birds, who can be quarantined at home, and high risk, such as pet rabbits or mice, who should be isolated in official laboratories for observation. The current epidemiological data do not support the risk of a pandemic.

Indexed as

animalsdiagnosisepidemiologygenomemonkeypoxtransmissiontreatment

Identifiers

PMID36077910
PMCPMC9454429

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.