Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 9, Number 2—February 2003
Research

Annual Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection Risk and Interpretation of Clustering Statistics

Emilia Vynnycky*Comments to Author , Martien W. Borgdorff†, Dick van Soolingen‡, and Paul E.M. Fine*
Author affiliations: *London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, England; †Royal Netherlands Tuberculosis Association, The Hague, the Netherlands; ‡National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Main Article

Figure 5

Comparison between model predictions of the clustering in different age groups and the proportion of disease attributable to recent infection or reinfection in the Netherlands and in settings in which the annual risk for infection has remained unchanged over time at 0.1%, 1%, and 3%.

Figure 5. Comparison between model predictions of the clustering in different age groups and the proportion of disease attributable to recent infection or reinfection in the Netherlands and in settings in which the annual risk for infection has remained unchanged over time at 0.1%, 1%, and 3%.

Main Article

Page created: June 08, 2011
Page updated: June 08, 2011
Page reviewed: June 08, 2011
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external