MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2928730275 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.02.047

Pertussis vaccine effectiveness in a frequency matched population-based case-control Canadian Immunization Research Network study in Ontario, Canada 2009–2015

2019· article· en· W2928730275 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Natasha S. Crowcroft, Kevin L. Schwartz, Cynthia Chen, Caitlin Johnson, Ye Li, Alex Marchand‐Austin, Shelly Bolotin, Frances Jamieson, Steven J. Drews, Margaret L. Russell, Lawrence W. Svenson, Kimberley Simmonds, Salaheddin M. Mahmud, Jeffrey C. Kwong

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaAlberta HealthAlberta Health ServicesProvincial Laboratory of Public HealthUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of AlbertaPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchKaiser PermanenteSanofi PasteurPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of CanadaInstitut pour la Recherche en Santé Publique
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsOdds ratioPopulationConfidence intervalBooster doseImmunizationPertussis vaccineIncidence (geometry)Logistic regressionDemographyImmunologyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Resurgences of pertussis have occurred in several high-income countries, often linked to waning of immunity from acellular pertussis vaccines. The degree of waning observed has varied by study design and setting. In Ontario, pertussis has not shown a substantial resurgence in the past decade. The routine immunization schedule comprises three priming doses in infancy, toddler and pre-school doses, and an adolescent dose at 14-16 years of age. METHODS: We estimated pertussis vaccine effectiveness (VE) through a case-control study of 1335 cases statutorily reported to public health in Ontario and occurring between January 1, 2009 and March 31, 2015, compared with 5340 randomly selected population controls, frequency-matched by age, primary-care provider and year of diagnosis. Pertussis cases met provincial confirmed or probable case definitions. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate crude and adjusted odds ratios (aOR). RESULTS: VE against pertussis was sustained between 92% (95% confidence interval (95%CI) 88-95%) in 2-3 year olds and 90% (95%CI: 80-95%) in 8-9 year olds, but fell rapidly to 49% (95%CI: 2-73%) in children 12-13 years of age. VE following the teenage booster given at 14-16 years in Ontario reached 76% (95%CI: 52-88%) in 14-16 year olds and 78% (95%CI: -31 to 96%) in those 16-22 years old. For children who were up-to-date with the immunization schedule, VE declined from 87% (95%CI: 84-90%) during the first year to 74% (95%CI: 63-82%) after 8 or more years following their last dose of immunization. CONCLUSIONS: VE is high during the first decade of life but then falls rapidly. Protection is not fully restored by the teenage booster. Our findings are consistent with the localized outbreaks we observe in high school children and underline the importance of additional policies to protect infants.

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)0.003
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccineSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207