MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2282226350 · doi:10.14288/1.0086312

Long-term follow-up of neonates who have been immunized with hepatitis B vaccine

2008· article· en· W2282226350 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marian Tomm Pastore

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis B Virus Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTerm (time)Hepatitis B vaccineVirologyPediatricsImmunologyIntensive care medicineHepatitis B virusVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the short-term effectiveness of hepatitis B vaccine has been well established, few long-term studies of the effectiveness of this vaccine in neonates who are born to HBsAg positive mothers have been undertaken. It is also not known if supplementary doses of vaccine are required to protect these children who are continuously exposed to the hepatitis B virus, and if so, how long after primary immunization the additional dose should be given. To determine the hepatitis B vaccine effectiveness up to eight years, a cohort of 770 (66%) of 1166 children who had been immunized with HBIG and hepatitis B vaccine at birth, between 1984 and 1989 inclusive, were tested for the serological markers: anti-HBc, anti-HBs and HBsAg. (Anti-HBc indicates that viral replication has occurred at some time (infection); anti-HBs is the antibody to HBsAg and may appear after natural infection or following immunization; and HBsAg indicates presence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection.) The children in the cohort were immunized as part of the British Columbia Ministry of Health Program to prevent HBV infection in infants of carrier mothers. Blood samples were obtained by finger-prick and tested at the Canadian Red Cross Society, Vancouver Centre, Blood Transfusion Service. The IMx assay kits were produced by Abbott Laboratories. Parents were interviewed for information on relevant variables. Associations were determined using chi-square tests, Mantel-Haenszel trend tests, linear and logistic regression procedures. Best prediction models for the outcomes: anti-HBc, anti-HBs and HBsAg were determined in a stepwise fashion. Of the participants, 31% of the mothers were HBeAg positive as well as HBsAg positive. The overall attack rate for ages 2 to 8years was 5.1%; the carrier rate was 2.3% and the seropositivity rate (>=10 mIU/ml) was 87.9%. The geometric mean titres of anti-HBs varied from a high of 272 mIU/ml at age two to a low of 23 mIU/ml at age seven. Vaccine efficacy for infection was 89%. The best predictors for infection were the mother's HBeAg status (P<0.0001), the age of the child when the first dose of vaccine was given (P=0.0001), the number of years the mother spent in her country of birth (P=0.001) and inversely the mother's age (P=0.002). Anti-HBs titres were best predicted by the inverse age of the child (P=0.0001), the number of doses of vaccine (P=0.0007), the age of the child when the first dose of vaccine was given (P=0.01) and the number of months the child spent abroad (P=0.05). Since the infection rate was relatively stable between age groups and the association between the child's age and anti-HBc was not significant (P=0.15), waning immunity is not suggested by the findings of this study. This was in spite of the decline in anti-HBs titres with increasing age. The conclusions of this study are: 1) That a booster dose of hepatitis B vaccine after the six month dose is not necessary at least up to age eight; 2) Because a delay in the first dose of vaccine resulted in increased infections, giving the first dose early is critical; 3) It could not be concluded from the data that HBIG was not important, therefore, continuation of HBIG at birth is recommended; 4) Since the timing of dose two later than two months after dose one was not found to be associated with increased infections, this dose could be incorporated with the regular immunization schedule at two months of age if administratively more feasible; 5) Susceptibility appears to arise earlier rather than later and may be due to non-response to the vaccine as a 14% non-response rate was found at 6 to 18 months of age.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicHepatitis B Virus StudiesFrench-language works237,207