4.4 Article

Risk Factors for Influenza A(H7N9) Disease in China, a Matched Case Control Study, October 2014 to April 2015

期刊

OPEN FORUM INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 3, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofw182

关键词

avian influenza A(H7N9); case-control study; risk factor

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology of China, Emergency Technology Research Issue on Prevention and Control for Human Infection with A(H7N9) Avian Influenza Virus [KJYJ-2013-01-02]
  2. China-US Collaborative Program on Emerging and Re-emerging Infectious Diseases

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Human infections with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus have been associated with exposure to poultry and live poultry markets (LPMs). We conducted a case-control study to identify additional and more specific risk factors. Methods. Cases were laboratory-confirmed A(H7N9) infections in persons in China reported from October 1, 2014 to April 30, 2015. Poultry workers, those with insufficient data, and those refusing participation were excluded. We matched up to 4 controls per case by sex, age, and residential community. Using conditional logistic regression, we examined associations between A(H7N9) infection and potential risk factors. Results. Eighty-five cases and 334 controls were enrolled with similar demographic characteristics. Increased risk of A(H7N9) infection was associated with the following: visiting LPMs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 6.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-15.3), direct contact with live poultry in LPMs (aOR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.1-15.6), stopping at a live poultry stall when visiting LPMs (aOR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.1-6.9), raising backyard poultry at home (aOR, 7.7; 95% CI, 2.0-30.5), direct contact with backyard poultry (aOR, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.1-22.1), and having >= 1 chronic disease (aOR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.5-6.5). Conclusions. Our study identified raising backyard poultry at home as a risk factor for illness with A(H7N9), suggesting the need for enhanced avian influenza surveillance in rural areas. .

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据