A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Safety and Immunogenicity of Tetanus, Diphtheria, and Acellular Pertussis Vaccine Immunization During Pregnancy and Subsequent Infant Immune Response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Immunization of pregnant women with tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) provides protection against pertussis to the newborn infant. Methods: In a randomized, controlled, observer-blind, multicenter clinical trial, we measured the safety and immunogenicity of Tdap during pregnancy and the effect on the infant's immune response to primary vaccination at 2, 4, and 6 months and booster vaccination at 12 months of age. A total of 273 women received either Tdap or tetanus-diphtheria (Td) vaccine in the third trimester and provided information for the safety analysis and samples for the immunogenicity analyses; 261 infants provided serum for the immunogenicity analyses. Results: Rates of adverse events were similar in both groups. Infants of Tdap recipients had cord blood levels that were 21% higher than maternal levels for pertussis toxoid (PT), 13% higher for filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA), 4% higher for pertactin (PRN), and 7% higher for fimbriae (FIM). These infants had significantly higher PT antibody levels at birth and at 2 months and significantly higher FHA, PRN, and FIM antibodies at birth and 2 and 4 months, but significantly lower PT and FHA antibody levels at 6 and 7 months and significantly lower PRN and FIM antibody levels at 7 months than infants whose mothers received Td. Differences persisted prebooster at 12 months for all antigens and postbooster 1 month later for PT, FHA, and FIM. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that Tdap during pregnancy results in higher levels of antibodies early in infancy but lower levels after the primary vaccine series. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT00553228.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".