Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 303

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Case-Case Comparison of Campylobacter coli and Campylobacter jejuni Infection: A Tool for Generating Hypotheses

Open access
Gillespie, Iain A., O’Brien, Sarah J., Frost, Jennifer A., Adak, Goutam K., Horby, Peter, Swan, Anthony V., Painter, Michael J., Neal, Keith R., the Campylobacter Sentinel Surveillance System Collaborators·2002·Emerging Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Preventing campylobacteriosis depends on a thorough understanding of its epidemiology. We used case-case analysis to compare cases of Campylobacter coli infection with cases of C. jejuni infection, to generate hypotheses for infection from standardized, population-based sentinel surveillance information in England and Wales. Persons with C. coli infection were more likely to have drunk bottled water than were those with C. jejuni infection and, in general, were more likely to have eaten pâté. Important differences in exposures were identified for these two Campylobacter species. Exposures that are a risk for infection for both comparison groups might not be identified or might be underestimated by case-case analysis. Similarly, the magnitude or direction of population risk cannot be assessed accurately. Nevertheless, our findings suggest that case-control studies should be conducted at the species level.

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 · 10.3201/eid0809.010817

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 303

Metadata

Authors
Gillespie, I. A., O’Brien, S. J., Frost, J. A., Adak, G. K., Horby, P., Swan, A. V., Painter, M. J., Neal, K. R., & Collaborators, T. C. S. S. S.
Venue
Emerging Infectious Diseases
Published
2002-09
Volume
8
Issue
9
Pages
937-942
ISSN
  • 1080-6040 (ISSN-L)
  • 1080-6059
OpenAlex
W2127874065
Cited by
303
References
1
FWCI
17.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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

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.