Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Study of the Immunogenicity and Safety of a Fully Liquid Combination Diphtheria–Tetanus Toxoid–Five-Component Acellular Pertussis (DTaP<sub>5</sub>), Inactivated Poliovirus (IPV), and Haemophilus influenzae Type b (Hib) Vaccine Compared with a DTaP<sub>3</sub>-IPV/Hib Vaccine Administered at 3, 5, and 12 Months of Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared the levels of immunogenicity and safety of diphtheria-tetanus toxoid-five-component acellular pertussis (DTaP(5)), inactivated poliovirus (IPV), and Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) (DTaP(5)-IPV-Hib) and DTaP(3)-IPV/Hib vaccines for study participants 3, 5, and 12 months of age. Post-dose 3 noninferiority criteria comparing DTaP(5)-IPV-Hib to DTaP(3)-IPV/Hib using rates of seroprotection were demonstrated against diphtheria, tetanus, and polio types 1 to 3, but not for polyribosylribitol phosphate (PRP). While PRP did not meet noninferiority criteria, the seroprotection rate and geometric mean concentration (GMC) were high, indicating a clinically robust immune response. GMCs or titers for other antigens (including pertussis) and the safety profiles were generally similar between groups. Fully liquid DTaP(5)-IPV-Hib can be administered using the 3-, 5-, and 12-month vaccination schedule. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT00287092.).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".