MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389029717 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofad500.1561

1729. Literature Review to Identify Evidence of Secondary Transmission of ROTATEQ® (RV5) Vaccine Strains to Unvaccinated Subjects

2023· article· en· W4389029717 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yuanqiu Li, Xiaojin Sun, Yaqun Fu, Xuedan You, Susanne Hartwig

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChecklistTransmission (telecommunications)Systematic reviewPediatricsVaccinationCohortClinical study designCohort studyMeta-analysisVaccine efficacyMEDLINERotavirusClinical trialDiarrheaInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Rotavirus (RV) is the leading cause of severe diarrhea in infants and young children. RV vaccination is recommended by WHO since 2009 for all children worldwide, especially in countries with a high number of diarrhea-associated deaths. Live attenuated vaccines can lead to horizontal transmission with the risk of vaccine-derived disease in contacts. Transmission of RV5 strains leading to clinical disease was not well evaluated in the pivotal clinical trials and only few case-reports have been described in the literature. Methods We performed a systematic literature review to investigate secondary transmission of RV5 vaccine strains to unvaccinated subjects globally. We searched Embase, Medline for English papers, CNKI, Wan Fang for Chinese papers and other resources (i.e., conference papers with full text, preprint platform including bioRxiv and medRxiv) from January 2005 to June 2021. Eligibility criteria for inclusion were original articles bases on non-interventional studies (case-control studies, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies) using RV5 vaccine strain transmission as outcomes. Other study or publication types were excluded such as pre-clinical studies, interventional studies and case reports. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used and study quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort studies and the JBI checklist for cross-sectional studies to assess risk of bias. Results The search generated 2,089 articles in total. Seven articles met all inclusion criteria, including six cohort studies and one cross-sectional study. All studies underwent quality assessment and complied with the quality criteria of NOS or JBI checklist respectively. Overall, none of the seven studies identified RV5 vaccine-type transmission to an unvaccinated population, in either hospitals or nurseries under a close contact environment. One study reported that 1% of unvaccinated infants had gastrointestinal symptoms but all symptoms were attributed to other clinical conditions. Conclusion We found no evidence of horizontal transmission of RV5 vaccine virus strains to unvaccinated infants despite the limited amount and descriptive nature of the identified studies. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.008
Bibliometrics0.0330.029
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.004

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiologyFrench-language works237,207