The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Population Incidence of Guillain-Barré Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Open accessAbstract
Population incidence of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is required to assess changes in GBS epidemiology, but published estimates of GBS incidence vary greatly depending on case ascertainment, definitions, and sample size. We performed a meta-analysis of articles on GBS incidence by searching Medline (1966–2009), Embase (1988–2009), Cinahl (1981–2009) and CABI (1973–2009) as well as article bibliographies. We included studies from North America and Europe with at least 20 cases, and used population-based data, subject matter experts to confirm GBS diagnosis, and an accepted GBS case definition. With these data, we fitted a random-effects negative binomial regression model to estimate age-specific GBS incidence. Of 1,683 nonduplicate citations, 16 met the inclusion criteria, which produced 1,643 cases and 152.7 million person-years of follow-up. GBS incidence increased by 20% for every 10-year increase in age; the risk of GBS was higher for males than females. The regression equation for calculating the average GBS rate per 100,000 person-years as a function of age in years was exp[–12.0771 + 0.01813(age in years)] × 100,000. Our findings provide a robust estimate of background GBS incidence in Western countries. Our regression model may be used in comparable populations to estimate the background age-specific rate of GBS incidence for future studies.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
A Re-Evaluation of Random-Effects Meta-Analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2009) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society · doi:10.1111/j.1467-985x.2008.00552.x · Cited by 2,569
Cited by
Musso, D., & Gubler, D. J. (2016) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00072-15 · Cited by 1,469
A Susceptible Mouse Model for Zika Virus Infection
Dowall, S. D., Graham, V. A., Rayner, E., Atkinson, B., Hall, G., Watson, R. J., Bosworth, A., Bonney, L. C., Kitchen, S., & Hewson, R. (2016) · PLoS neglected tropical diseases · doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0004658 · Cited by 323
Incidence of Guillain-Barré syndrome after COVID-19 vaccination in the vaccine safety datalink
Hanson, K. E., Goddard, K., Lewis, N., Fireman, B., Myers, T. R., Bakshi, N., Weintraub, E., Donahue, J. G., Nelson, J. C., Xu, S., et al. (2022) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.8879 · Cited by 160
Guillain-Barre syndrome and influenza vaccines: a meta-analysis.
Martín Arias, L. H., Sanz, R., Sáinz, M., Treceño, C., & Carvajal, A. (2015) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.05.013 · Cited by 132
Frontera, J. A., Tamborska, A. A., Doheim, M. F., Garcia‐Azorin, D., Gezegen, H., Guekht, A., Yusof Khan, A. H. K., Santacatterina, M., Sejvar, J., Thakur, K. T., et al. (2022) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.26339 · Cited by 108
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Sejvar, J. J., Baughman, A. L., Wise, M., & Morgan, O. W.
- Venue
- Neuroepidemiology
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2011
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 123-133
- ISSN
- 0251-5350 (ISSN-L)
- 1423-0208
- OpenAlex
- W1971947774
- Cited by
- 960
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.39
- 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: Population Incidence of Guillain-Barré Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000324710
- The paper
- Sejvar, J. J., Baughman, A. L., Wise, M., & Morgan, O. W. (2011). Population Incidence of Guillain-Barré Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Neuroepidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1159/000324710
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.