ReviewPaediatric drugs2004
Role of influenza vaccine for healthy children in the US.
Review in Paediatric drugs, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the influenza virus-specific effector and memory B-cell responses to immunization of children and adults with live attenuated or inactivated influenza virus vaccines.Journal of virology · 2007Trial
- Research trends and key contributors in studies on influenza vaccines for children: A 20-year bibliometric analysis.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Article
- Identification of a novel compound targeting the nuclear export of influenza A virus nucleoprotein.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2018Article
- Verdinexor, a novel selective inhibitor of nuclear export, reduces influenza a virus replication in vitro and in vivo.Journal of virology · 2014Article
- Virus-vectored influenza virus vaccines.Viruses · 2014Review
- Seasonal influenza and vaccine herd effect.Clinical and experimental vaccine research · 2014Review
- Enhancement of the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of a mucosal influenza subunit vaccine by the saponin adjuvant GPI-0100.PloS one · 2012Article
- The impact of influenza on working days lost: a review of the literature.PharmacoEconomics · 2008Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Influenza infection is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in adults, but the highest attack rates for influenza regularly occur in children, particularly those in preschool and elementary school. The consequences of influenza in this younger population - increased rate of hospitalization in those younger than 2 years of age and serious associated morbidity - have been underestimated. Children are also the critical link for spreading influenza in the community. Recent data suggest that mass influenza vaccination of healthy children would not only protect recipients, but also may reduce the burden of influenza throughout the community. During the past 3 decades, efforts to control influenza have focused on the use of an injectable trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV) in high-risk persons. The vaccine is 'safe' and effective, but its acceptance and uptake by patients and healthcare providers have been modest at best. A new intranasal, live-attenuated, trivalent cold-adapted influenza virus vaccine (CAIV-T) [FluMist] is 'safe', well tolerated, immunogenic, and efficacious in preventing influenza illness in healthy children. Compared with TIV, CAIV-T is easier to administer and should be more readily acceptable, particularly for mass immunization campaigns. CAIV-T also induces a broader immune response and has demonstrated protection against at least three different variant influenza strains. This vaccine is particularly well suited for routine immunization of children and thus offers the potential for greatly improved control of influenza. However, the acquisition cost per single dose of FluMist for the 2003-4 season ( approximate, equals 46 US dollars) significantly hampered its uptake both by practitioners and by managed care organizations, even despite a later approximate, equals 25 US dollars rebate offer. For the 2004-5 season, CAIV-T is likely to be only modestly more expensive (average wholesale price: 16.50 US dollars for non-returnable doses, 23 US dollars for returnable doses) than TIV. The practitioner must consider the benefits of FluMist compared with its likely higher vaccine cost and the issues of reimbursement among multiple insurers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.