Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Morens, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Katz, A. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Morens, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Katz, A. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 134, No. 6: 628-640
Copyright © 1991 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health

research-article

The "Fourth Disease" of Childhood: Reevaluation of a Nonexistent Disease

David M. Morens1, and Alan R. Katz2

1Section of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, and Department of Tropical Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Hawaii Honolulu, HI
2 Section of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Hawaii Honolulu, HI

Reprint requests to David M. Morens, Biomed D103, 1960 East-West Road, Honolulu, HI 96822

Observed and described between 1884 and 1900, "fourth disease" (Dukes disease) followed measles, scarlet fever, and rubella as the fourth clinically characterized childhood exanthem. Like rubella ("third disease") and erythema infectiosum ("fifth disease"), accepted by the medical community at about the same time, the existence of fourth disease was initially controversial. Over the following decades descriptions of hundreds of cases, outbreaks, and laboratory studies were published in the indexed medical literature. Unlike rubella and fifth disease, however, fourth disease was not subsequently proven to exist by either epidemiologic criteria or isolation of an etiologic agent. By the 1930s, it was infrequently recognized and by the 1960s had been dropped from textbooks. In this study, the authors use epidemiologic methods to reevaluate published data on English schoolchildren from 1892 to 1900 upon which the original fourth disease claim of Dukes was based. The authors conclude that fourth disease never existed. Reinterpretation of the original data suggests that cases can be completely explained as misdiagnosed rubella and scarlet fever. Misidentification of fourth disease is attributed to failures in the critical abilities of the medical and scientific communities at the time. The implications of erroneously identifying a nonexistent disease suggest that modern scientific approaches to disease identification are sound. Am J Epidemiol 1991 ;134: 628-40.

exanthema; history of medicine; rubella; scarlet fever


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 AJPHHome page
D. M. Morens
Characterizing a "New" Disease: Epizootic and Epidemic Anthrax, 1769-1780
Am J Public Health, June 1, 2003; 93(6): 886 - 893.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.