SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000
Vaccines for preventing cholera.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOral cholera vaccines are newer alternatives to the parenteral vaccines which have been thought to confer only moderate and short-term immunity.
objectivesThe objective of this review was to assess the effect of cholera vaccines in preventing cases of cholera and preventing deaths. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group trials register, Medline, Embase and reference lists of articles. We handsearched the journal Vaccine, contacted researchers in the field and manufacturers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised studies comparing cholera vaccines (killed or live) with placebo, control vaccines or no intervention, or comparing types, doses or schedules of cholera vaccine. We included adults and children irrespective of immune status or special risk category. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data extraction and assessment of trial quality was done independently by two reviewers. MAIN
resultsTwenty-five trials were included. Eighteen efficacy trials of relatively good quality, testing parenteral and oral killed whole cell vaccines and involving over 2.6 million adults, children and infants were included. No randomised efficacy trials of live vaccines were available and therefore this review is restricted to killed vaccines only. Eleven safety trials have been conducted for both types of killed whole cell vaccines and have involved 9,342 people. For killed whole cell vaccines compared to placebo, the relative risk of contracting cholera at 12 months was 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.41 to 0.59 (random effects model). This translates to an efficacy of 51%, 95% confidence interval 41% to 59%. Both parenteral and oral administration were relatively efficacious, but significant protection extended into the third year for oral killed whole cell vaccines. Children under 5 were only protected for up to a year, while older children or adults were protected for up to three years. Parenteral killed whole cell vaccines were associated with increased systemic and local adverse effects compared to placebo, while oral killed whole cell vaccines were not. REVIEWER'S
conclusionsCholera killed whole cell vaccines appear to be relatively effective and safe. Protection against cholera appears to persist for up to two years following a single dose of vaccine, and for three to four years with an annual booster.
Indexed as
Identifiers
11034693What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.