Skip to main content

Table 1 Overview of studies of residential crowding and RSV disease by risk status a (N = 20)

From: Residential crowding and severe respiratory syncytial virus disease among infants and young children: A systematic literature review

    

Crowding Variables

 

Reference

Study Type/Population

Numberof Participants

Age Criteria

≥1 Significant in Unadjusted Analysis

≥1 Significant in Adjusted Analysis

Bias Assessment b

High-risk population, (n = 9)

    

Broughton et al., 2005 c[15]

Cohor, <32-week GA, UK

N = 126

≤1 year

Not conducted

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Bulkow et al., 2002[23]

Case–control, Alaska natives, US

Cases n = 204

Controls n = 338

<3 years

Yes

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Carbonell-Estrany et al., 2000[24]

Cohort, ≤32-week GA, Spain

N = 584

≤1 year

Yes

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Carbonell-Estrany et al., 2001[25]

Cohort, ≤32-week GA, Spain

N = 999

≤6 months in October

Yes

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Figueras-Aloy et al., 2004[26]

Case–control, 33- to 35-week GA, Spain

Cases n = 186

Controls n = 371

<1 year

Yes

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Figueras-Aloy et al., 2008[18]

2 Cohorts, 32- to 35-week GA, Spain

Cohort 1 (cases), n = 202

Cohort 2 (controls), n = 5239

Discharged during or ≤6 months of age at start of RSV season

Yes

Not applicabled

No apparent bias concerns

Kanra et al., 2005[27]

Cohort, 64.3% preterm (<35-week GA), 20.8% CHF, Turkey

N = 332

<6 months and preterm; <2 years with CLD

No

Not conducted

No multivariate analysis

Law et al., 2004[19]

Cohort, 33- to 35-week GA, Canada

N = 1860

≤7 months (or older to end of RSV season)

Yes

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Simoes et al., 1993[22]

Case–control, Multiples vs. singletons, all ≤32-week GA with CLD; US

Cases n = 34

Controls n = 34

Combined group analyzed

<2 years

Yes

NR

Multivariate analysis NR

Mixed-risk population, (n = 11)

    

Albargish and Hasony, 1999 c[16]

Cross-sectional study, Iraq

n = 500 with LRTI (37.6% RSV-positive); n = 57 controls

<5 years

No

Not conducted

No multivariate analysis

Flores et al., 2004 c[14]

Cohort, Portugal

N = 225 (137 RSV-positive, 88 RSV-negative)

<3 years

No

Not conducted

No multivariate analysis

Hayes et al., 1989[21]

Case–control, American Samoa

Cases n = 13

Controls n = 45

<2 years

Yes

Not conducted

No multivariate analysis

Holberg et al., 1991 c[17]

Cohort, US

N = 1179

≤1 year

Yes

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Lanari et al., 2002[28]

Cohort, Italy

N = 1232

<2 years

Yes

Not conducted

No multivariate analysis

Nielsen et al., 2003[20]

Case–control, Denmark

Cases n = 1272

Controls n = 6075

<2 years

Not conducted

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Okiro et al., 2008 c[9]

Cohort, Kenya

N = 469

<2 weeks old, followed for 3 RSV seasons

Yes

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Reeve et al., 2006[29]

Case–control, Australia

Cases n = 271

Controls n = 542

<3 years

Not conducted

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Rossi et al., 2007[30]

Case–control, Italy

Cases n = 145

Controls n = 292

≤4 years

Yes

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

von Linstow et al., 2008[31]

Cohort, Denmark

N = 217

≤1 year

Yes

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

Weber et al., 1999[32]

Case–control, Gambia

Cases n = 277

Controls n = 364

Not specified, median 9 months

Yes

Yes

No apparent bias concerns

  1. CHF = congestive heart failure; CLD = chronic lung disease; GA = gestational age; LRTI = lower respiratory tract infection; NR = not reported; RSV = respiratory syncytial virus; UK = United Kingdom; US = United States.
  2. a Risk status of study population: High risk = high risk of severe RSV disease; includes children born prematurely (<35 weeks gestation), of certain ethnicities (i.e. Alaska Native; Inuit), or with chronic lung disease of prematurity or congenital heart disease. Mixed risk = children with individual differences in risk of severe RSV disease; includes studies of the general population even when a minority of the study population includes high-risk children.
  3. bBias was assessed for selective reporting (not presenting all outcomes related to residential crowding) and confounding (not adjusting for other factors that may affect the association of residential crowding and severe RSV disease).
  4. c Treatment of RSV disease was not limited to the hospital setting in this study. Patients were diagnosed in the physician’s office, the emergency department, an outpatient clinic, or in multiple settings including the hospital.
  5. d In the Figueras-Aloy study of 2008 [18], one crowding variable was negative in unadjusted analysis and a second crowding variable (having school-aged siblings) was significant in the unadjusted analysis but was not entered by itself into the multivariate model.