New Measles Genotype, Uganda
Emerging Infectious Diseases·
- DOI
- 10.3201/eid1110.050431
- PMID
- 16318690
- PMCID
- PMC3366748
- OpenAlex
- W2043777347
- Study type
- Genomic study
- Publisher
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
- Article type
- journal-article
- Integrity
- current
Why this research matters now
The abstract states that the sequence data may improve molecular epidemiologic work for describing measles transmission patterns in eastern Africa.
Structured evidence summary
Research question
The article addresses genetic characterization of wild-type measles virus isolates from Uganda and whether the analyzed viruses fit within existing WHO-recognized genotypes.
Study design
This was a genomic study analyzing measles virus isolates collected during outbreaks. The abstract describes sequence analysis of nucleoprotein and hemagglutinin genes, followed by phylogenetic comparison with WHO reference sequences.
Population and setting
The setting was Uganda, with 36 virus isolates from outbreaks in six districts collected between 2000 and 2002.
Main findings
The Ugandan isolates were described as closely related to each other and forming a distinct group within clade D. They were not closely matched to the WHO reference sequences for the 22 recognized genotypes, and the authors proposed them as genotype d10.
Public-health relevance
The abstract states that the sequence data may improve molecular epidemiologic work for describing measles transmission patterns in eastern Africa.
Important limitations
The abstract directly indicates a limited sample frame: 36 isolates from outbreaks in six Ugandan districts during 2000-2002. This summary is also limited to the supplied single-article abstract and metadata; the full paper would be needed for decision-grade interpretation.
GIDS interpretation
For discoverability, the supplied classifiers place this peer-reviewed genomic study under measles, Uganda, genomic epidemiology, and outbreak investigation. The classifier list also includes influenza, which is not supported by the title or abstract and may require editorial review.
Related GIDS surveillance
Literature context does not validate, explain, or change a surveillance signal. Exact and contextual relationships are shown separately.
Evidence relationships
This article has 8 auditable classifier relationships to diseases, places, topics, and study design.