MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2137745757 · doi:10.1136/adc.85.2.83

Varicella vaccination—a critical review of the evidence

2001· review· en· W2137745757 sur OpenAlexafffund
Sue Skull, Elaine E. L. Wang

Notice bibliographique

RevueArchives of Disease in Childhood · 2001
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Établissements canadiensSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesHospital for Sick Children
Mots-clésMedicineChickenpox VaccineVaccinationChickenpoxVirologyImmunologyVaricella vaccinePediatricsImmunizationVirusAntibody

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Varicella (chickenpox) is an universal, highly infectious disease characterised by a pruritic vesicular eruption associated with fever and malaise caused by varicella zoster virus (VZV).In children, the illness is usually self limiting, lasting four to five days, but at least 1% of children under 15 years experience a complication.1 2 These include secondary bacterial infection (particularly with group A beta haemolytic streptococcus), 3 pneumonia, encephalitis, haemorrhagic complications, hepatitis, arthritis, and Reye syndrome.4 Furthermore, 10-50% of all children will visit a physician with an infection.[5][6][7] The mortality rate of varicella in children under 14 years in the United States is estimated at 2 per 100 000 cases, 8 and 90% of these have no risk factors for severe disease.9 Adults experience only 5% of all varicella cases, but experience more severe disease (hospitalisations 18 per 1000) and deaths (50 per 100 000).10 Herpes zoster (shingles), a painful, dermatomal, vesicular rash occurs with reactivation of the virus in approximately 15% of the population.11 The likelihood of developing herpes zoster increases with advancing age: the incidence is approximately 74 per 100 000 children aged under 10 years, 11 300 per 100 000 adults aged 35-44 years, 12 and 1200 per 100 000 adults over 75 years.12 In temperate climates, 95% of varicella cases occur among persons less than 20 years of age.13 14 Seropositivity is lower in adults from tropical and subtropical areas.15 16 Seronegativity in adults may be increasing in temperate populations, as shown by a significant upward trend in age distribution of chickenpox cases in England and Wales, 17 and increasing varicella susceptibility in young US adults.18 A live attenuated varicella vaccine was first developed in 1974 in Japan by Takahashi and colleagues.19 As this Oka strain virus is heat sensitive, Biken/Oka vaccine (Japan) and Varivax (Oka/Merck) require storage at -15°C and administration within 30 minutes of reconstitution to retain potency (product monograph).Oka strain vaccines were first licensed for use in high risk children in Europe in 1984 and Japan in 1986.Licensure for use in healthy children commenced in 1986 in Japan, 1988 in Korea, and most recently in the USA, Sweden, and Germany (1995), 20 21 and Canada (December 1998).22 Many millions of doses have been given in total. Aims of reviewThe purpose of this review was to evaluate the evidence that bears on the various options for use of vaccine to prevent varicella in healthy individuals.These include universal vaccination of healthy infants, catch up vaccination of older children, and vaccination of susceptible adolescents and adults.Models of cost eVectiveness and epidemiological change suggest that implementation of routine varicella vaccination for infants and children could reduce total number of cases and case severity, and generate cost savings.23 Potential harm that may occur as a result of vaccination includes immediate adverse reactions, transmission of varicella from vaccinees, an increased risk of zoster, and a shift in varicella cases to an older age group (and hence more severe disease).24 In evaluating varicella vaccine it is important that these issues are considered in addition to vaccine eVectiveness. Methodology of searchMEDLINE was searched from 1966 to December 2000 using the MeSH subheadings chickenpox, vaccination, and human (search date 19 January 2001).There was no language restriction.Methodological search terms included: random allocation, placebo, doubleblind method, comparative study, epidemiologic methods, research design, clinical trials, controlled clinical trials, meta-analysis, drug evaluation, prospective studies, and evaluation studies.EMBASE was searched using a similar strategy.To identify other studies, we searched reference lists of located studies; the Internet for position papers and summaries from health organisations such as the World Health Organisation and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; vaccine product information; and the Cochrane Library.Published studies were included if they: (1) considered healthy, human subjects vaccinated with VZV vaccine; and (2) were controlled trials addressing the incidence of varicella, zoster, or adverse outcomes.Prospective cohort studies were considered only for longer term outcomes of varicella and zoster following vaccination.To limit the analysis to studies with the highest methodological quality, prospective cohort studies were excluded if: (a) they contained less than 50 subjects; (b) loss to follow up was not described; or (c) duration of follow up was less than one year.All eligible

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,028

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,013
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,002
Bibliométrie0,0060,006
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0030,003
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,051
Tête enseignante GPT0,381
Écart entre enseignants0,331 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations47
Publié2001
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueArchives of Disease in ChildhoodMême sujetHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207