Three‐Year Follow‐Up of protection Rates in Children Given Varicella Vaccine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate and severity of subsequent varicella and zoster among children given a varicella vaccine. DESIGN: Retrospective survey conducted three years after vaccination, using standardized telephone interviews. SETTING: Three urban Canadian centres (Halifax, Ottawa and Vancouver). PARTICIPANTS: Of 475 eligible children, 431 aged three to 15 years participated. INTERVENTION: Participants had received one dose of a live, attenuated varicella vaccine (Oka/GSK) an average of 36 months earlier. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Interviewers asked about known varicella exposures and obtained descriptions of any illnesses reported as varicella or zoster. Reported varicella was classified as definite (vesicles present, physician confirmation), probable (vesicles reported), suspected (nonvesicular rash, recent contact with varicella) or unlikely (nonvesicular rash, no known contact). RESULTS: Parents reported 257 within-home exposures to varicella and alleged that 80 subjects had had varicella rash after exposure. Of these, 40 cases were classified as definite or probable (vesicles present; rate 9.3% or 3.1% per year on average), 31 as suspected (no vesicles; rate 2.4% per year) and nine as unlikely. All rash illnesses were mild: among children with vesicles, 75% were said to have up to 10 and none had more than 100. The outcome of 76 exposures to household members with varicella was evaluable: 25 (32.9%) resulted in a rash, and 13 (17.1%) of those involved vesicles (maximum 40 lesions). Parents alleged that three subjects had zoster, but only one illness was definite (six vesicles, physician confirmed). CONCLUSIONS: Varicella vaccination completely prevented the development of typical chickenpox during the three years of observation. Breakthrough infections were infrequent (about 5% per year) and mild. Zoster was rare.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".