SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.
- Community-level interventions for mitigating the risk of waterborne diarrheal diseases: a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Antirotavirus IgA seroconversion rates in children who receive concomitant oral poliovirus vaccine: A secondary, pooled analysis of Phase II and III trial data from 33 countries.PLoS medicine · 2019Trial
- Evaluation of rotavirus, pneumococcal conjugate and human papillomavirus vaccination in four Pacific island countries: A cost-effectiveness modelling study.PLoS medicine · 2026Article
- Knowledge and Behavioral Practice of Mothers About Childhood Diarrhea in Arar City, Saudi Arabia.Cureus · 2024Article
- Economic Evaluation of Rotavirus Vaccination in Children Aged Under Five Years in South Africa.Clinical drug investigation · 2023Article
- Vaccines against gastroenteritis, current progress and challenges.Gut microbes · 2020Review
- Article
- National rotavirus vaccination programme implementation and gastroenteritis presentations: the paediatric emergency medicine perspective.Irish journal of medical science · 2020Article
- Rotavirus vaccine efficacy: current status and areas for improvement.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2019Review
- Human rotavirus in Iran; molecular epidemiology, genetic diversity and recent updates on vaccine advances.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2019Review
- Estimating the distribution of morbidity and mortality of childhood diarrhea, measles, and pneumonia by wealth group in low- and middle-income countries.BMC medicine · 2018Article
- 'First 1000 days' health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: alignment of South African policies with high-quality evidence.Global health action · 2017Article
- Health impact and cost-effectiveness of a domestically-produced rotavirus vaccine in India: A model based analysis.PloS one · 2017Article
- The epidemiology of all-cause and rotavirus acute gastroenteritis and the characteristics of rotavirus circulating strains before and after rotavirus vaccine introduction in Yemen: analysis of hospital-based surveillance data.BMC infectious diseases · 2015Observational
- Gastroenteritis attributable to rotavirus in hospitalized Saudi Arabian children in the period 2007-2008.Clinical epidemiology · 2015Article
- The Lives Saved Tool (LiST) as a model for diarrhea mortality reduction.BMC medicine · 2014Article
- Anti-infective activities of lactobacillus strains in the human intestinal microbiota: from probiotics to gastrointestinal anti-infectious biotherapeutic agents.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRotavirus results in more diarrhoea-related deaths in children less than five years of age than any other single agent in low- and middle-income countries. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in high-income countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that all children should be vaccinated with a monovalent rotavirus vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals) or a pentavalent rotavirus vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck & Co., Inc.), with a stronger recommendation for countries where deaths due to diarrhoea comprise more than 10% of all deaths. Lanzhou lamb rotavirus vaccine (LLR; Lanzhou Institute of Biomedical Products) is used in China only.
objectivesTo evaluate rotavirus vaccines approved for use (RV1, RV5, and LLR) for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the efficacy of rotavirus vaccines on all-cause diarrhoea, hospital admission, death, and safety profiles. SEARCH
methodsFor this update, we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed) in October 2011, and in June 2011 we searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2), , EMBASE, LILACS, and BIOSIS. We also searched the ICTRP (28 June 2011) and checked reference lists of identified studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomized controlled trials in children comparing rotavirus vaccines approved for use with placebo, no intervention, or another vaccine. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. They combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) and used GRADE to evaluate evidence quality, which was reflected as follows: high quality ("vaccine prevents..."); moderate quality ("vaccine probably prevents..."); or low quality ("vaccine may prevent..."). MAIN
resultsForty-three trials, including nine new trials for this update, met the inclusion criteria and enrolled 190,551 participants. Thirty-one trials assessed RV1, and 12 trials evaluated RV5. We did not find any trials assessing LLR.In children aged less than one year, RV1, compared to placebo, probably prevents 70% of all cases of rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.50; seven trials, 12,130 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and 80% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.35; seven trials, 35,004 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Similarly, RV5 prevents 73% of all rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.33; four trials, 7614 participants; high-quality evidence), and 77% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.71; three trials, 6953 participants; high-quality evidence). Both vaccines prevent over 80% of rotavirus diarrhoea cases that require hospitalization. For all-cause diarrhoea, based on two multi-centred trials from South Africa, Malawi, and Europe, RV1 may reduce severe cases by 42% (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.84; two trials, 8291 participants; low--quality evidence). Also, based on one trial from Finland, RV5 may reduce severe cases by 72% (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.48; one trial, 1029 participants; low-quality evidence).During the second year of life, compared to placebo, RV1 probably prevents 70% of all cases of rotavirus diarrhoea of any severity (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.43; six trials, 8041 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and 84% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.21; eight trials, 32,854 participants; moderate-quality evidence). RV5 prevents 49% of all rotavirus diarrhoea cases of any severity (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.72; four trials, 9784 participants; high-quality evidence), and 56% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.88; four trials, 9783 participants; high-quality evidence). For all-cause diarrhoea, RV1 probably reduces severe cases by 51% (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.60; two trials, 6269 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and RV5 showed no difference with placebo (three trials, 8533 participants).Reported serious adverse events (including intussusception) after vaccination were measured in 95,178 children for RV1 and 77,480 for RV5, with no difference between the vaccines. AUTHORS'
conclusionsRV1 and RV5 vaccines are effective in preventing rotavirus diarrhoea. These data support the WHO's global vaccine recommendation. The potential for reduced vaccine efficacy in low-income countries needs to be investigated. No increased risk of intussusception was detected, but surveillance monitoring studies are probably advisable in countries introducing the vaccine nationally.
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.