Translated from the Spanish and reprinted with permission from the Revista Cubana de Higiene y Epidemiología, Vol 48 No 18, Jan–Apr 2010.
Original available at: http://bvs.sld.cu/revistas/hie/vol_48_1_10/hie02110.htm

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE Determine point prevalence of febrile syndromes and compare with prevalence reported by habitual clinical and seroepidemiologic dengue surveillance system in Havana City.

METHODS In October 2007, a descriptive, cross-sectional study was carried out in a representative sample, calculating prevalences of febrile syndromes and undifferentiated febrile syndromes. Chi-square analysis was used for rate comparisons.

RESULTS Point prevalences of febrile syndromes and undifferentiated febrile syndromes were 352.6 and 144.2 times greater, respectively, than those reported by the habitual clinical and seroepidemiologic dengue surveillance system; these differences were statistically significant (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS Point prevalence of febrile syndromes was far greater than prevalence reported by the habitual clinical and seroepidemiologic dengue surveillance system, an indication of underreporting.

KEYWORDS fever, undifferentiated fever, dengue, dengue fever, dengue/epidemiology, seroepidemiologic studies, Cuba

Over a decade ago, the Commission on Health Research for Development published a pioneering study on the gross imbalance between the world’s research funding priorities and global disease burden distribution. This study reported that less than 10% of world resources for health research were being applied to the health problems of developing countries, where 90% of the avoidable burden of ill-health was to be found. What became known as the “10/90 gap” has captured the attention and imagination of those committed to global health equity everywhere, searching for ways to incline the research agenda towards “diseases of the poor”.