MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158822359 · doi:10.1542/peds.2014-1729

Duration of Pertussis Immunity After DTaP Immunization: A Meta-analysis

2015· review· en· W2158822359 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioWhooping coughPertussis vaccineHerd immunityConfidence intervalVaccinationBooster doseMeta-analysisImmunizationPediatricsImmunityDiphtheriaImmunologyInternal medicineImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pertussis incidence is increasing, possibly due to the introduction of acellular vaccines, which may have decreased the durability of immune response. We sought to evaluate and compare the duration of protective immunity conferred by a childhood immunization series with 3 or 5 doses of diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP). METHODS: We searched Medline and Embase for articles published before October 10, 2013. Included studies contained a measure of long-term immunity to pertussis after 3 or 5 doses of DTaP. Twelve articles were eligible for inclusion; 11 of these were included in the meta-analysis. We assessed study quality and used meta-regression models to evaluate the relationship between the odds of pertussis and time since last dose of DTaP and to estimate the probability of vaccine failure through time. RESULTS: We found no significant difference between the annual odds of pertussis for the 3- versus 5-dose DTaP regimens. For every additional year after the last dose of DTaP, the odds of pertussis increased by 1.33 times (95% confidence interval: 1.23-1.43). Assuming 85% vaccine efficacy, we estimated that 10% of children vaccinated with DTaP would be immune to pertussis 8.5 years after the last dose. Limitations included the statistical model extrapolated from data and the different study designs included, most of which were observational study designs. CONCLUSIONS: Although acellular pertussis vaccines are considered safer, the adoption of these vaccines may necessitate earlier booster vaccination and repeated boosting strategies to achieve necessary "herd effects" to control the spread of pertussis.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.234 · 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