MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How Soon After a Prior Tetanus-Diphtheria Vaccination Can One Give Adult Formulation Tetanus-Diphtheria-Acellular Pertussis Vaccine?

2006· article· en· W2090669764 on OpenAlexaff
Scott A. Halperin, Lamont Sweet, Darlene Baxendale, Anne Neatby, Petra Rykers, Bruce R. Smith, Mitchell Zelman, Diane Maus, Pierre Lavigne, Michael D. Decker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsSanofi (Canada)Health PEIDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTetanusReactogenicityDiphtheriaToxoidVaccinationErythemaPediatricsImmunizationAdverse effectDiphtheria toxinAnesthesiaSurgeryImmunologyInternal medicineAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Adult formulation tetanus and diphtheria toxoids and acellular pertussis vaccines (Tdap) have been developed to prevent pertussis in adolescents and adults. There are concerns that unacceptable rates of severe injection site reactions, including Arthus-type reactions might occur if Tdap is administered too soon after a previous tetanus and diphtheria toxoid-containing vaccine formulated for infants and younger children (TD) or older children and adults (Td). METHODS: To evaluate whether adverse reactions after Tdap might be related to time since last receipt of TD/Td, we performed an open label, province-wide, clinical trial comparing the reactogenicity of Tdap given 18 months-9 years versus > or = 10 years after a previous TD/Td. RESULTS: Seven thousand one hundred fifty-six children and adolescents were enrolled in the study (464-963 subjects per cohort), and 7001 had documented dates of the previous immunization within the specified intervals; adverse event data were provided by 5931 (84.7%). No whole limb swelling, Arthus-like reactions or serious adverse events related to vaccination were reported. No differences in reports of fever were found by interval since last immunization. Injection site erythema and swelling were slightly and statistically significantly increased among those participants with most recent prior TD/Td. Compared with the 10-year interval group, the maximum increase for any other group was < or = 8.6% for any erythema, < or = 6% for erythema > 10 mm, < or = 10.3% for any swelling, < or = 6.9% for swelling > 10 mm, < or = 5.2% for any pain and < or = 3.7% for moderate/severe pain. CONCLUSION: Although there is a slight increase in injection site events with decreasing interval since a previous immunization, Tdap can be safely administered at intervals of > or = 18 months since a previous TD/Td vaccine.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations81
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Pediatric Infectious Disease JournalSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207