Introduction to symposium: a century after the 1918 influenza pandemic

Chowell, Gerardo; Sullivan, Patrick S.; Rothenberg, Richard

doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.03.010

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This case study responds to recent calls for more research on historical pandemics, with particular attention to the range of sources that reliably recorded mortality at the individual, local, regional, and national level. [3][4][5][6] Scholars researching historical pandemics can learn from contemporary surveillance tools to distinguish between the low number of deaths attributed to influenza and the larger numbers attributed to influenza-associated diseases, particularly pneumonia. 7 By focusing on this question of how many people died from influenza-associated illnesses, this case study contributes to the existing literature on Russian influenza, which has primarily focused on questions of global spread, medical research, journalistic reporting, and public response.…”

Section: Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

“The Most Disastrous and Fatal Epidemic”: Mortality Statistics During the 1890 Russian Influenza Epidemic in Connecticut

Ewing

2021

Public Health Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the Russian influenza pandemic, which reached the United States in late 1889, US public health officials attempted to document the number of deaths associated with this disease outbreak. A historical perspective illuminates the complex categories used to classify deaths from influenza-associated diseases; substantial changes in weekly, monthly, and yearly death totals; and thoughtful efforts by health officials to measure the epidemic as it happened. The 1114 influenza deaths reported by the Connecticut State Board of Health in the 3 years after the January 1890 outbreak must be supplemented by the notable increases in the number of deaths from respiratory diseases, which elevates the likely toll to more than 7000 deaths during the epidemic. Whereas historians of public health have primarily examined efforts to control communicable diseases, this case study of mortality statistics reported by town officials and analyzed by the Connecticut State Board of Health demonstrates how officers of the local boards of health also responded to unexpected outbreaks of a familiar disease such as influenza. Understanding how organizations measured influenza-associated mortality illustrates an important stage in the development of American public health and also makes an important contribution to studying pandemics in history.

show abstract

Section: Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

“The Most Disastrous and Fatal Epidemic”: Mortality Statistics During the 1890 Russian Influenza Epidemic in Connecticut

Ewing

2021

Public Health Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The BBC Four Pandemic [61] raising public awareness in the UK, as well as events such as the 30th anniversary of World AIDS Day. There were also a number of journal highlights and special issues marking the centenary of the 1918 Spanish influenza pandemic, including a special issue of the journal Annals of Epidemiology [100] and a web focus of the journal Nature [101].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection, forecasting and control of infectious disease epidemics: modelling outbreaks in humans, animals and plants

Thompson

Brooks-Pollock

2019

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 1918 influenza pandemic is one of the most devastating infectious disease epidemics on record, having caused approximately 50 million deaths worldwide. Control measures, including prohibiting non-essential gatherings as well as closing cinemas and music halls, were applied with varying success and limited knowledge of transmission dynamics. One hundred years later, following developments in the field of mathematical epidemiology, models are increasingly used to guide decision-making and devise appropriate interventions that mitigate the impacts of epidemics. Epidemiological models have been used as decision-making tools during outbreaks in human, animal and plant populations. However, as the subject has developed, human, animal and plant disease modelling have diverged. Approaches have been developed independently for pathogens of each host type, often despite similarities between the models used in these complementary fields. With the increased importance of a One Health approach that unifies human, animal and plant health, we argue that more inter-disciplinary collaboration would enhance each of the related disciplines. This pair of theme issues presents research articles written by human, animal and plant disease modellers. In this introductory article, we compare the questions pertinent to, and approaches used by, epidemiological modellers of human, animal and plant pathogens, and summarize the articles in these theme issues. We encourage future collaboration that transcends disciplinary boundaries and links the closely related areas of human, animal and plant disease epidemic modelling. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Modelling infectious disease outbreaks in humans, animals and plants: approaches and important themes’. This issue is linked with the subsequent theme issue ‘Modelling infectious disease outbreaks in humans, animals and plants: epidemic forecasting and control’.

show abstract

“…Influenza-associated hospitalizations for critical illness (between 5% and 19% of all influenza hospitalizations) have increased considerably over the past several decades. 6 Considering the similar symptoms and transmission of these two diseases, in the future, similar to influenza, COVID-19 is likely to become a seasonal epidemic, 11 which will lead to a greater medical resource burden, especially in ICUs. Therefore, we conducted this study to evaluate critically ill COVID-19 patients and critically ill influenza patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes in Intensive Care Units Between Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and Patients with Influenza: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Zhong,

Wang,

Guo

et al. 2024

J Intensive Care Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Severe infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or influenza virus can cause patients to be admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). It is necessary to understand the differences in clinical characteristics and outcomes between these two types of critically ill patients. Methods We searched Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science for articles and performed a meta-analysis using Stata 14.0 with a random-effects model. This paper was written in strict accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results Thirty-five articles involving 131,692 ICU patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 30,286 ICU patients with influenza were included in our meta-analysis. Compared with influenza patients, COVID-19 patients were more likely to be male (odds ratio (OR) = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.54-1.99) and older (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.03-0.29). In terms of laboratory test results, COVID-19 patients had higher lymphocyte (SMD = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17-0.59) and platelet counts (SMD = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.29-0.75) but lower creatinine (SMD = −0.29, 95% CI: −0.55-0.03) and procalcitonin levels (SMD = −0.78, 95% CI: −1.11-0.46). Diabetes (SMD = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.08-1.48) and hypertension (SMD = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.05-1.60) were more prevalent in COVID-19 patients, while influenza patients were more likely to have cancer (OR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.44-0.62), cirrhosis (OR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.44-0.62), immunodepression (OR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.25-0.58), and chronic pulmonary diseases (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.24-0.52). We also found that patients with COVID-19 had longer ICU stays (SMD = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05-0.34), were more likely to develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (OR = 4.90, 95% CI: 2.77-8.64), and had higher mortality (OR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.17-1.55). Conclusions There are some differences in the basic characteristics, comorbidities, laboratory test results and complications between ICU patients with COVID-19 and ICU patients with influenza. Critically ill patients with COVID-19 often require more medical resources and have worse clinical outcomes. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42023452238

show abstract

Introduction to symposium: a century after the 1918 influenza pandemic

Cited by 5 publications

References 5 publications

“The Most Disastrous and Fatal Epidemic”: Mortality Statistics During the 1890 Russian Influenza Epidemic in Connecticut

“The Most Disastrous and Fatal Epidemic”: Mortality Statistics During the 1890 Russian Influenza Epidemic in Connecticut

Detection, forecasting and control of infectious disease epidemics: modelling outbreaks in humans, animals and plants

Comparison of Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes in Intensive Care Units Between Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and Patients with Influenza: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About