Global search

Find data and evidence

Type at least 2 characters. Use arrow keys to review and Enter to open.

Peer reviewedOpen accessRabiesNipah virus infection

Nipah Virus Encephalitis Reemergence, Bangladesh

Emerging Infectious Diseases·

Vincent P. Hsu, Mohammed Jahangir Hossain, Umesh D. Parashar, Mohammed Monsur Ali, Thomas G. Ksiazek, Ivan Kuzmin, Michael Niezgoda, Charles Rupprecht, Joseph Bresee, Robert F. Breiman

DOI
10.3201/eid1012.040701
PMID
15663842
PMCID
PMC3323384
OpenAlex
W2042499956
Study type
Journal article
Publisher
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Article type
journal-article
Integrity
current

Why this research matters now

The authors recommend surveillance and improved diagnostic capacity to detect Nipah virus infection.

01

Structured evidence summary

Research question

The study investigated two outbreaks of encephalitis in Meherpur and Naogaon, Bangladesh, in 2001 and 2003, including possible transmission sources and infection among patients, contacts, residents, hospital workers, and animals.

Study design

Retrospective outbreak investigation involving serum collection from ill persons, household contacts, randomly selected residents, hospital workers, and animals, with laboratory-confirmed and probable case classifications.

Population and setting

The setting was Meherpur and Naogaon, Bangladesh, during outbreaks in 2001 and 2003. The abstract describes patients, household contacts, randomly selected residents, hospital workers, and various animals.

Main findings

The investigation identified 13 cases in Meherpur and 12 in Naogaon. Patients were more likely than nonpatients to report close contact with other patients or contact with a sick cow. Two Pteropus bats had antibodies to Nipah virus, while hospital worker samples were negative.

Public-health relevance

The authors recommend surveillance and improved diagnostic capacity to detect Nipah virus infection.

Important limitations

The summary is limited to the supplied single-article abstract and metadata, and decision-grade interpretation would require review of the original paper.

GIDS interpretation

This article is linked to outbreak investigation, surveillance, transmission dynamics, and diagnostics in Bangladesh. The supplied evidence does not connect it to any current or live surveillance signal.

02

Related GIDS surveillance

Literature context does not validate, explain, or change a surveillance signal. Exact and contextual relationships are shown separately.

03

Evidence relationships

This article has 12 auditable classifier relationships to diseases, places, topics, and study design.

about diseaseaddresses topicaddresses topicaddresses topicaddresses topicevaluates interventionhas pathogen typestudied instudied population settingstudies populationstudies populationuses study design