Intussusception after Rotavirus Vaccine Introduction in India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A three-dose, oral rotavirus vaccine (Rotavac) was introduced in the universal immunization program in India in 2016. A prelicensure trial involving 6799 infants was not large enough to detect a small increased risk of intussusception. Postmarketing surveillance data would be useful in assessing whether the risk of intussusception would be similar to the risk seen with different rotavirus vaccines used in other countries. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, hospital-based, active surveillance study at 27 hospitals in India. Infants meeting the Brighton level 1 criteria of radiologic or surgical confirmation of intussusception were enrolled, and rotavirus vaccination was ascertained by means of vaccination records. The relative incidence (incidence during the risk window vs. all other times) of intussusception among infants 28 to 365 days of age within risk windows of 1 to 7 days, 8 to 21 days, and 1 to 21 days after vaccination was evaluated by means of a self-controlled case-series analysis. For a subgroup of patients, a matched case-control analysis was performed, with matching for age, sex, and location. RESULTS: From April 2016 through June 2019, a total of 970 infants with intussusception were enrolled, and 589 infants who were 28 to 365 days of age were included in the self-controlled case-series analysis. The relative incidence of intussusception after the first dose was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.00 to 3.00) in the 1-to-7-day risk window and 0.35 (95% CI, 0.00 to 1.09) in the 8-to-21-day risk window. Similar results were observed after the second dose (relative incidence, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.20 to 2.15] and 1.23 [95% CI, 0.60 to 2.10] in the respective risk windows) and after the third dose (relative incidence, 1.65 [95% CI, 0.82 to 2.64] and 1.08 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.73], respectively). No increase in intussusception risk was found in the case-control analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The rotavirus vaccine produced in India that we evaluated was not associated with intussusception in Indian infants. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others.).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".