No evidence for links between autism, MMR and measles virus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We examined whether, in the UK, there is an increased risk of autism (AD) following exposures, in early life, to: (1) wild measles; (2) live attenuated measles, alone or in combination as MMR; and (3) the alteration of the mumps strain within MMR. METHOD: We conducted time trend analyses of 2407 AD subjects born between 1959-93; and for comparison, 4640 Down's syndrome (DS) subjects born between 1966-93. Between 1968-86, we correlated variations in AD and DS births with wild measles incidence. Between 1959-93, we tested for abrupt changes in the long-term AD birth trend for the effects of introducing: (1) monovalent measles vaccines in 1968; (2) MMR immunization in 1988; and (3) the 'overnight switch' from mixed use of Urabe MMR to exclusive use of Jeryl-Lynn MMR in 1992. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were used as measures of association. RESULTS: We found no significant association between AD births and exposure (prenatal and postnatal up to 18 months age) to population rates of measles infections, and no 'step-up' increase in AD births associated with the introduction of monovalent measles and MMR vaccines, and changing mumps strain. An unexpected reduction in AD births of 21% (95% CI 6.9-33.3%; P=0.005) among the post-1987 birth cohorts was detected. CONCLUSION: No increased risk of AD following exposures to wild measles and vaccinations with monovalent measles, and Urabe or Jeryl-Lynn variants of MMR was detected. The precise meaning of the detected AD births reduction is unclear. Our study cannot exclude rare complications of MMR, given its correlational design.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
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".