MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2569307502 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0169368

Effectiveness of the 23-Valent Pneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine (PPV23) against Pneumococcal Disease in the Elderly: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017· review· en· W2569307502 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gerhard Falkenhorst, Cornelius Remschmidt, Thomas Harder, Eva Hummers, Ole Wichmann, Christian Bogdan

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPneumonia and Respiratory Infections
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisObservational studyPneumococcal polysaccharide vaccineSystematic reviewRandomized controlled trialCohort studyInternal medicinePneumococcal conjugate vaccineClinical trialMEDLINEVaccine efficacyVaccinationPediatricsStreptococcus pneumoniaePneumococcal diseaseImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Routine vaccination of elderly people against pneumococcal diseases is recommended in many countries. National guidelines differ, recommending either the 23-valent polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23), the 13-valent conjugate vaccine (PCV13) or both. Considering the ongoing debate on the effectiveness of PPV23, we performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the vaccine efficacy/effectiveness (VE) of PPV23 against invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) and pneumococcal pneumonia in adults aged ≥60 years living in industrialized countries. METHODS: We searched for pertinent clinical trials and observational studies in databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We assessed the risk of bias of individual studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. We rated the overall quality of the evidence by GRADE criteria. We performed meta-analyses of studies grouped by outcome and study design using random-effects models. We applied a sensitivity analysis excluding studies with high risk of bias. RESULTS: We identified 17 eligible studies. Pooled VE against IPD (by any serotype) was 73% (95%CI: 10-92%) in four clinical trials, 45% (95%CI: 15-65%) in three cohort studies, and 59% (95%CI: 35-74%) in three case-control studies. After excluding studies with high risk of bias, pooled VE against pneumococcal pneumonia (by any serotype) was 64% (95%CI: 35-80%) in two clinical trials and 48% (95%CI: 25-63%) in two cohort studies. Higher VE estimates in trials (follow-up ~2.5 years) than in observational studies (follow-up ~5 years) may indicate waning protection. Unlike previous meta-analyses, we excluded two trials with high risk of bias regarding the outcome pneumococcal pneumonia, because diagnosis was based on serologic methods with insufficient specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis revealed significant VE of PPV23 against both IPD and pneumococcal pneumonia by any serotype in the elderly, comparable to the efficacy of PCV13 against vaccine-serotype disease in a recent clinical trial in elderly people. Due to its broader serotype coverage and the decrease of PCV13 serotypes among adults resulting from routine infant immunization with PCV13, PPV23 continues to play an important role for protecting adults against IPD and pneumococcal pneumonia.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0280.047
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations260
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicPneumonia and Respiratory InfectionsFrench-language works237,207