Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 438

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical and Laboratory Diagnosis of Dengue Virus Infection

Open access
Muller, David A., Depelsenaire, Alexandra C. I., Young, Paul R.·2017·The Journal of Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Infection with any of the 4 dengue virus serotypes results in a diverse range of symptoms, from mild undifferentiated fever to life-threatening hemorrhagic fever and shock. Given that dengue virus infection elicits such a broad range of clinical symptoms, early and accurate laboratory diagnosis is essential for appropriate patient management. Virus detection and serological conversion have been the main targets of diagnostic assessment for many years, however cross-reactivity of antibody responses among the flaviviruses has been a confounding issue in providing a differential diagnosis. Furthermore, there is no single, definitive diagnostic biomarker that is present across the entire period of patient presentation, particularly in those experiencing a secondary dengue infection. Nevertheless, the development and commercialization of point-of-care combination tests capable of detecting markers of infection present during different stages of infection (viral nonstructural protein 1 and immunoglobulin M) has greatly simplified laboratory-based dengue diagnosis. Despite these advances, significant challenges remain in the clinical management of dengue-infected patients, especially in the absence of reliable biomarkers that provide an effective prognostic indicator of severe disease progression. This review briefly summarizes some of the complexities and issues surrounding clinical dengue diagnosis and the laboratory diagnostic options currently available.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/infdis/jiw649

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 29 references

Cited by

See all 438

Metadata

Authors
Muller, D. A., Depelsenaire, A. C. I., & Young, P. R.
Venue
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
Published
2017-03-01
Volume
215
Issue
suppl_2
Pages
S89-S95
ISSN
  • 0022-1899 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6613
OpenAlex
W2606996549
Cited by
438
References
29
FWCI
24.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical and Laboratory Diagnosis of Dengue Virus Infection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/infdis/jiw649
The paper
Muller, D. A., Depelsenaire, A. C. I., & Young, P. R. (2017). Clinical and Laboratory Diagnosis of Dengue Virus Infection. The Journal of Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiw649

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.