Fig 1.
Flow diagram showing the number of articles identified in the systematic review on typhoid and paratyphoid in India.
Table 1.
Meta-regression of variables associated with the proportion of individuals who are confirmed to have typhoid fever based on a univariate and multivariate model.
Fig 2.
Prevalence of laboratory confirmed typhoid among patients with fever or suspected typhoid fever ordered by study year.
Error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals, which are also given in square brackets for each study. Diamonds show the pooled estimates by patient group and overall together with 95% confidence intervals based on the fit of the random effects (RE) binomial (meta-) regression model. *indicates studies carried out during an outbreak of typhoid fever. ^indicates studies that used serology (alone or in addition to culture) to test for typhoid fever.
Table 2.
Meta-regression of variables associated with the proportion of individuals who are confirmed to have paratyphoid fever based on a univariate and multivariate model.
Fig 3.
Prevalence of laboratory confirmed paratyphoid among patients with fever or suspected typhoid fever ordered by study year.
Details as for Fig 2.
Fig 4.
Incidence of typhoid fever based on community cohort studies.
A) Incidence by study and pooled estimates (diamonds) are shown based on the fit of the random effect (RE) Poisson (meta-) regression model. The error bars and horizontal extent of the diamonds correspond with the 95% confidence intervals, which are also given in square brackets. B) Incidence by age-group for each study. Note differences in the definitions of the age-categories. We used the number of people enumerated at baseline to estimate the number of individuals at risk for the Kolkata 2004 estimate, since person-years of observation was not reported in this study [29].