Measles in Children Vaccinated With 2 Doses of MMR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A previous measles outbreak investigation in a high school in Quebec, Canada identified 2-dose vaccine effectiveness of 94%. The risk of measles in 2-dose recipients was significantly higher (2-4 times) when measles vaccine was first administered at 12 versus ≥ 15 months of age, with no significant effect of the age at second dose. Generalizability of this association was also assessed in the expanded provincial data set of notified cases. METHODS: This matched case-control study included only 2-dose recipients. All confirmed (laboratory or epidemiologically linked) cases in patients aged 5 to 17 years were included. Each case was matched to 5 controls. RESULTS: A total of 102 cases and 510 controls were included; 89% of cases were in patients 13 to 17 years old. When the first dose was administered at 12 to 13 months compared with ≥ 15 months of age, the risk of measles in participants outside the outbreak school was 6 times higher (95% confidence interval, 1.33-29.3) and was 5.2 times higher (95% confidence interval, 1.91-14.3) in the pooled estimate (participants from the outbreak school + outside that school). CONCLUSIONS: A significantly greater risk of measles among 2-dose recipients whose first dose was given at 12 to 13 months rather than ≥ 15 months of age is confirmed in the larger Quebec data set. The mechanism remains unknown, but vaccine failures in 2-dose recipients could have substantial implications for measles elimination efforts through 2-dose vaccination. The optimal age at first dose may warrant additional evaluation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".