Rotavirus Vaccination in the NICU: Where Are We? A Rapid Review of Recent Evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Rotavirus is a leading cause of viral acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in infants. Neonates hospitalized in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) are at risk of rotavirus infections with severe outcomes. The administration of rotavirus vaccines is only recommended, in the United States and Canada, upon discharge from the NICU despite rotavirus vaccine being proven safe and effective in these populations, due to risks of live-attenuated vaccine administration in immunocompromised patients and theoretical risks of rotavirus vaccines strains shedding and transmission. We summarized recent evidence regarding rotavirus vaccines administration in the NICU setting and safety of rotavirus vaccines in preterm infants. Methods: We conducted a rapid review of the literature from the past 10 years, searching Medline and Embase, including all study types except reviews, reporting on rotavirus vaccine 1 and rotavirus vaccine 5; NICU setting; shedding or transmission; and/or safety in preterm. One reviewer performed data extraction and quality assessment. Results: In total, 31 articles were analyzed. Vaccine-derived virus shedding following rotavirus vaccination existed for nearly all infants, mostly during the first week after dose 1, with rare transmission described only in the household setting. No case of transmission in the NICU was reported. Adverse events were mild to moderate, occurring in 10%–60% of vaccinated infants. Extreme premature infants or with underlying gastrointestinal failure requiring surgery presented more severe adverse events. Conclusions: Recommendations regarding rotavirus vaccine administration in the NICU should be reassessed in light of the relative safety and absence of transmission of rotavirus vaccine strains in the NICU. Funding: None Disclosures: Sicard Mélanie: I reference the use of rotavirus vaccines in the NICU setting, which is not recommended; I discuss possible reassessment of these recommendations.
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".