Talk:Index case

Untitled

I like the "list of miscellaneous information" -- the list of "Patient Zeros in Fiction." I think it should get to stay! --Amanda French (talk) 14:12, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Removed from the article: "Among other things, Shilts had made up conversations that portrayed Dugas as either reckless about the possibility that he might be spreading the disease or actually vengeful about it (although there was no possibility that he could ever harm the man who had infected him, who was probably dead)."

Accusing a journalist (dead or alive) of making things up is an incredibly serious allegation. If something like this is going to be stated as fact, it really needs to be attributed to someone who made the claim and backed up by a reference. Jsnell 19:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

CNN writes "Edgar Hernandez, 5, known as "patient zero," survived the earliest documented case of swine flu." This article references the first person to die of swine flu as patient zero. Shouldn't that be changed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.201.48.25 (talk) 12:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

This research paper from a very well referenced and highly researched source does confirm that Shilts probably did distort the truth about Dugas. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4046389/ Andrew ranfurly (talk) 21:25, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Richard Brown

We are certain that our primary case, a one Richard Brown, contracted the disease in a regional park, but we don't know which. Here is our patient zero, if you take a look at my report, I indicated that there were traces of... (please correct me if I am wrong, and your welcomed for the House-ish theme to my response. AV) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.82.139.21 (talk) 21:48, 6 November 2009

This begs the question, who are you? and what is your report? And who is Richard Brown?Riverpa (talk) 19:54, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Patient Zero

I have de-emphasized the use of the term Patient Zero from this article for a couple of reasons. One, it has significant differences from the meaning of the term Index patient. Index patient is the first identified case, other cases are then tracked forward and backward from it. Patient Zero appears to used more as the genesis of a disease. Two, Index patient is an epidemiological term, Patient Zero is not. Three, the meaning of Patient Zero seems to have been established in reference to the HIV epidemic, and it has drifted from there to be used in other ways in the popular press. Therefore the meaning seems to be 1) rather recent and 2)in flux.

If someone feels that it is important enough, I would prefer to see a new article for the term Patient Zero, rather than conflating it with Index patient, which has a stable and well defined meaning already. Of course, there is significant overlap in the meanings which is why I left it in the article, just not on an equal basis as a definition or synonym of Index patient.Riverpa (talk) 19:52, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the sentence: "This theory is contradicted by the fact that Robert Rayford died in St. Louis, Missouri of complications from AIDS in 1969, and most likely became infected in the 1950s." Robert Rayford was 16 when he died. If he became infected in the 1950s, he was at maximum seven years old. Is the writer really claiming he became infected from sexual abuse at or younger than seven? If so, there really should be some kind of source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.190.225.172 (talk) 12:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

An index case is not the same as a primary case or patient zero. See http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(14)62331-X/fulltext. I think that the majority of this article's content would fit better under a primary case or patient zero page, with patient zero probably being the better known term, but since this index case page already exists it probably should stay if only to clarify that it is not the same as a primary case and link to the new article. I suggest that someone else should make a new article since I'm new to editing on Wikipedia and don't really know how to go about creating a new article. On that page it would be important to note that although patient zero tends to generally refer to the primary case, Gaëtan Dugas himself was not a primary case. See http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/08/health/patient-zero-history-super-spreaders/index.html or https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/10/26/498876985/mystery-solved-how-hiv-came-to-the-u-s. On that note, maybe the new article should just be named "Primary case." --Meriid (talk) 05:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. You have a good point and a new article may be useful. A useful resource for writing about medical topics is WP:RSMED. Billhpike (talk) 07:26, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

On second thought, while index case and primary case refer to different things in most cases, patient zero widely used to refer to both, and in such cases the term index case is given a broader definition than is technically intended as per http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(14)62331-X/fulltext. While the primary case may or may not be known, index case also generally used to refer to earliest known case in subsequent literature or the first documented case, even after the fact. i.e. Mabalo Lokela, who died of a then-unknown illness but to whom the resulting outbreak of what came to be named Ebola was later traced back to. Technically, in epidemiological terms as per the article above, the index case or cases would refer to those first individuals who were reported at the onset of what was eventually suspected to be an outbreak of Ebola. However, in general terms, Lokela may be referred to as patient zero or an index case as even though Ebola was not suspected or reported at the time of Lokela's death, the outbreak was eventually traced back to him and his case of Ebola was reported after the fact. --Meriid (talk) 21:05, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Importance

Is there any practical medical use in the determination of the exact index case or is it a mere point of fact that comes out of an exhaustive epidemiological investigation? I don't get its medical significance from the entry. I'm guessing that maybe when the index case is resistant and keeps causing new outbreaks .. but chances he/she didn't create a new vessel in an epidemic are rather slim. Maybe the index case can yield clues on how the new critter was allowed to evolve or something? The entry is missing something. Dugodugo (talk) 03:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

The index patient is the first human case known. The first time the disease is expressed in a human that anyone can figure in light of a new and unknown disease. Doctors always share information about unusual symptoms they can't categorize. This is how the real index cases were tracked down in HIV. By using the "Letters to the Editor" of the New England Journal of Medicine that came in in the 1970s. Several doctors described symptoms that did not fit any other known infectious disease process. These doctors had ordered blood and other tissue laboratory tests while they were caring for the patients. Epidemiologists were later able to go back and check these samples thanks to the doctors who'd written in to the NEJM. That doesn't mean that at some time in the distant past, other cases didn't happen. They just weren't made known. Everything, every disease process has a tipping point. In effect, an index patient represents the tipping point when a 'new' disease becomes known. Malke 2010 (talk) 01:57, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

And yes, the index patient can reveal how the critter evolved. It's the transmission history. Most common source is mammal to mammal then to man, who is also a mammal. Like bat to pig then to humans. Knowing the transmission history means you can figure it out. Important to know for vaccine production. Malke 2010 (talk) 03:22, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

It's an epidemiological concept/term and is clearly an important factor in those studies. So yes, medically significant but in a different way than you were thinking, as pointed out above. Gotitbro (talk) 17:38, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Index case. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051214123317/http://andrejkoymasky.com:80/liv/fam/biod3/duga1.html to http://andrejkoymasky.com/liv/fam/biod3/duga1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:21, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Gaëtan Dugas

Why is Gaëtan Dugas used as an example of an Index Case when epidemiology studies have proven this a not true and in the Wikipedia entry for Gaëtan Dugas it explicitly states he was not Patient Zero in the USA as earlier disease was found? Dugas gave many details of his partners and, as he was from Canada, he was designated Patient O, O standing for 'Out of area'. It is dangerous to use a popular misconception as an example of the source of an epidemic. Andrew ranfurly (talk) 21:37, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 2 December 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Sceptre (talk) 19:27, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

---

Index case → Patient zero – Patient zero is the WP:COMMONNAME of this subject. PhotographyEdits (talk) 10:44, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: 'Index case' seems to get far more hits than 'patient zero', Ngrams has similar levels for both, but slightly more for 'index case', and Google Scholar has roughly three times the hits for 'index case'. YorkshireExpat (talk) 14:59, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
• oppose much to my surprise it appears that index case is the common name in WP:RS. See g-scholar hits [1], [2]—blindlynx 19:07, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.