Safety of the oral cholera vaccine in pregnancy: Retrospective findings from a subgroup following mass vaccination campaign in Dhaka, Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pregnant women are vulnerable to complications of cholera. Killed oral cholera vaccines (OCV) are not recommended for pregnant women though there is no evidence of harmful effects during pregnancy. We evaluated the effect of a killed OCV, Shanchol™, on pregnancy outcomes during an effectiveness trial of the vaccine in urban Bangladesh. METHODOLOGY: Individuals ⩾1year were invited to participate in the trial, conducted in 2011 in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Pregnancy by history was an exclusion criterion and all women of reproductive age (15-49years) were verbally questioned about pregnancy at enrollment and prior to vaccination. Out of 48,414 women of reproductive age 286 women received the OCV unknowingly while pregnant. Out of these, we could recruit 69 women defined as exposed to OCV. Accordingly, we selected 69 pregnant women randomly from those who did not take the OCV (non-exposed to OCV). We evaluated adverse pregnancy outcome (spontaneous miscarriages, still births, or congenital malformations) between those who were exposed to OCV and those who were not exposed to OCV. RESULTS: About 16% of pregnant women exposed to OCV had pregnancy loss, as compared to 12% of unvaccinated pregnant women (P=0.38). One congenital anomaly was observed and occurred in women non-exposed to OCV group. Models that adjusted for baseline characteristics that were unbalanced between the exposed and non-exposed groups, revealed a no elevation of risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in vaccinees versus non-vaccinees (Adj. OR (95% CI): 0.45 (0.11-1.88). CONCLUSIONS: No excess of adverse fetal outcomes associated with receipt of OCV was observed in this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov number NCT01339845.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".