MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055179152 · doi:10.1542/peds.2004-2509

Pertussis in Adolescents and Adults: Should We Vaccinate?

2005· article· en· W2055179152 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Grace M. Lee, Charles W. LeBaron, Trudy V. Murphy, Susan Lett, Stephanie L. Schauer, Tracy A. Lieu

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationPertussis vaccinePediatricsIncidence (geometry)Adverse effectEnvironmental healthImmunologyImmunizationImmune systemInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The incidence of reported pertussis among adolescents, adults, and young infants has increased sharply over the past decade. Combined acellular pertussis vaccines for adolescents and adults are available in Canada, Australia, and Germany and may soon be considered for use in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the potential health benefits, risks, and costs of a national pertussis vaccination program for adolescents and/or adults. DESIGN, SETTING, AND POPULATION: The projected health states and immunity levels associated with pertussis disease and vaccination were simulated with a Markov model. The following strategies were examined from the health care payer and societal perspectives: (1) no vaccination; (2) 1-time adolescent vaccination; (3) 1-time adult vaccination; (4) adult vaccination with boosters; (5) adolescent and adult vaccination with boosters; and (6) postpartum vaccination. Data on disease incidence, costs, outcomes, vaccine efficacy, and adverse events were based on published studies, recent unpublished clinical trials, and expert panel input. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cases prevented, adverse events, costs (in 2004 US dollars), cost per case prevented, and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved. RESULTS: One-time adolescent vaccination would prevent 30800 cases of pertussis (36% of projected cases) and would result in 91000 vaccine adverse events (67% local reactions). If pertussis vaccination cost $15 and vaccine coverage was 76%, then 1-time adolescent vaccination would cost $1100 per case prevented (or $1200 per case prevented) or $20000 per QALY (or $23000 per QALY) saved, from the societal (or health care payer) perspective. With a threshold of $50000 per QALY saved, the adolescent and adult vaccination with boosters strategy became potentially cost-effective from the societal perspective only if 2 conditions were met simultaneously, ie, (1) the disease incidence for adolescents and adults was > or =6 times higher than base-case assumptions and (2) the cost of vaccination was less than $10. Adult vaccination strategies were more costly and less effective than adolescent vaccination strategies. The results were sensitive to assumptions about disease incidence, vaccine efficacy, frequency of vaccine adverse events, and vaccine costs. CONCLUSIONS: Routine pertussis vaccination of adolescents results in net health benefits and may be relatively cost-effective.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations128
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207