Rubella Outbreak in the Netherlands, 2004–2005
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In The Netherlands and Canada the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine coverage is high. In 2004 a rubella outbreak started in the Netherlands in a population subgroup with low coverage, with subsequent spread to Canada. METHODS: We examined data on rubella cases in the Netherlands and Canada reported between September 2004 and July 2005. In The Netherlands we established enhanced surveillance for congenital rubella while in Canada we carried out a cohort study to estimate vaccine effectiveness. RESULTS: In The Netherlands and Canada, 387 and 309 rubella cases were reported, respectively. Of these, 97% were in unvaccinated individuals of orthodox protestant denomination. Reported consequences of rubella in pregnancy were 2 fetal deaths and 14 infants with congenital infection. Of the latter, 11 had clinical defects including deafness in all but eye defects in none. The estimated vaccine effectiveness was 99.3% (95% CI: 95.3%-99.9%). Closely related strains of rubella virus genotype 1G were found in Dutch and Canadian cases. CONCLUSIONS: A large rubella outbreak occurred in The Netherlands with spread to Canada in a population subgroup with religious objections to vaccination. Its major public health importance was due to the high burden of congenital disease, international spread and implications for measles and rubella surveillance and elimination. Congenital deafness occurred more frequently and eye defects less frequently than expected. The estimated rubella vaccine effectiveness was very high. Our results demonstrate the risks associated with heterogeneity in rubella vaccine coverage. High rubella vaccine coverage in all population subgroups and sensitive surveillance are crucial for elimination of rubella and CRS.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".