MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589432820 · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000001888

Safety of Tetanus, Diphtheria, and Pertussis Vaccination During Pregnancy

2017· review· en· W2589432820 on OpenAlexaff
Mark McMillan, Michelle Clarke, Adriana Parrella, Deshayne B. Fell, Gayatri Amirthalingam, Helen Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTetanusDiphtheriaPregnancyMedicineVaccinationPediatricsVirologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess antenatal, birth, and infant outcomes for pregnant women, fetuses, and infants after antenatal vaccination with any antigen present in combination pertussis vaccines. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, Literature in the Health Sciences in Latin America and the Caribbean, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, and World Health Organization (inception to May 5, 2016). METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Studies reporting outcomes for pregnant women, their fetus, or infant after antenatal exposure to either monovalent or combined tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) or inactivated polio vaccines were considered for inclusion. RESULTS: A total of 21 studies were included in this review. Point estimates ranged from 0.47 to 1.50 for preterm birth (less than 37 weeks of gestation), 0.65-1.00 for small for gestational age (birth weight less than the 10th percentile), 0.36-0.85 for stillbirth, 0.16-1.00 for neonatal death, 0.76-1.20 for low birth weight (less than 2,500 g), and 0.20-0.91 for congenital anomalies. All lower 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were less than 1.0. Of three retrospective studies assessing chorioamnionitis after vaccination, one showed a small but statistically significant increase. Point estimates for all anomalies after antenatal tetanus toxoid vaccination ranged from 1.20 to 1.60 and had 95% CIs that crossed 1.0. There was substantial clinical and methodologic heterogeneity from mainly retrospective observational studies with an overall high risk of bias. Objective rates of fever were low, 3% or below, and more common systemic events observed included headache, malaise, and myalgia. CONCLUSION: Evidence suggests that antenatal combined Tdap administered during the second or third trimester of pregnancy is not associated with clinically significant harms for the fetus or neonate. Medically attended events in pregnant women are similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.111
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.111
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations98
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207