Safety of BCG vaccination and revaccination in healthcare workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BCG vaccination and revaccination are increasingly being considered for the protection of adolescents and adults against tuberculosis and, more broadly, for the off-target protective immunological effects against other infectious and noninfectious diseases. Within an international randomized controlled trial of BCG vaccination in healthcare workers (the BRACE trial), we evaluated the incidence of local and serious adverse events, as well as the impact of previous BCG vaccination on local injection site reactions (BCG revaccination). Prospectively collected data from 99% (5351/5393) of participants in Australia, Brazil, Spain, The Netherlands and the UK was available for analysis. Most BCG recipients experienced the expected self-limiting local injection site reactions (pain, tenderness, erythema, swelling). BCG injection site itch was an additional common initial local symptom reported in 49% of BCG recipients. Compared to BCG vaccination in BCG-naïve individuals, BCG revaccination was associated with increased frequency of mild injection site reactions, as well as earlier onset and shorter duration of erythema and swelling, which were generally self-limiting. Injection site abscess and regional lymphadenopathy were the most common adverse events and had a benign course. Self-resolution occurred within a month in 80% of abscess cases and 100% of lymphadenopathy cases. At a time when BCG is being increasingly considered for its off-target effects, our findings indicate that BCG vaccination and revaccination have an acceptable safety profile in adults.
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 | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".