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 64 papers, 9 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
64 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 385 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Kawasaki Disease and the Use of the Rotavirus Vaccine in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Pooled it
- Systematic review of the rotavirus infection burden in the WHO-EMRO region.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2019Pooled it
- Immunogenicity of different dosing schedules of the human live attenuate rotavirus vaccine (RV1) in infants and children: a meta-analysis.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2019Pooled it
- Population effectiveness of the pentavalent and monovalent rotavirus vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.BMC infectious diseases · 2017Pooled it
- Efficacy, safety and effectiveness of licensed rotavirus vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis for Latin America and the Caribbean.BMC pediatrics · 2017Pooled it
- Bayesian network meta-analysis suggests a similar effectiveness between a monovalent and a pentavalent rotavirus vaccine: a preliminary report of re-analyses of data from a Cochrane Database Systematic Review.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2014Pooled it
- Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of the human rotavirus vaccine, RIX4414 oral suspension, when co-administered with routine childhood vaccines in Chinese infants.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2016Trial
- Interference of Monovalent, Bivalent, and Trivalent Oral Poliovirus Vaccines on Monovalent Rotavirus Vaccine Immunogenicity in Rural Bangladesh.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2016Trial
- Efficacy of a monovalent human-bovine (116E) rotavirus vaccine in Indian infants: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.Lancet (London, England) · 2014Trial
- Challenges to the Effectiveness and Immunogenicity of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Narrative Review with a Systematic Approach.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Indirect Effects of Universal Infant Rotavirus Vaccination: A Narrative Systematic Review.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Seasonal Trends in the Prevalence and Incidence of Viral Encephalitis in Korea (2015-2019).Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Differences in epidemiology of enteropathogens in children pre- and post-rotavirus vaccine introduction in Kilifi, coastal Kenya.Gut pathogens · 2022Article
- Challenges and opportunities in setting up a phase III vaccine clinical trial in resource limited settings: Experience from Nepal.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
- Advancements in protein nanoparticle vaccine platforms to combat infectious disease.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology · 2021Review
- What defines an efficacious COVID-19 vaccine? A review of the challenges assessing the clinical efficacy of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2021Review
- A genetic barcode of SARS-CoV-2 for monitoring global distribution of different clades during the COVID-19 pandemic.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2020Article
4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 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 countries with high childhood mortality. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in countries with low childhood mortality. Currently licensed rotavirus vaccines include a monovalent rotavirus vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals) and a pentavalent rotavirus vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck & Co., Inc.). 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. SEARCH
methodsWe searched MEDLINE (via PubMed) (1966 to May 2012), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (10 May 2012), CENTRAL (published in The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 5), EMBASE (1974 to 10 May 2012), LILACS (1982 to 10 May 2012), and BIOSIS (1926 to 10 May 2012). We also searched the ICTRP (10 May 2012), www.ClinicalTrials.gov (28 May 2012) and checked reference lists of identified studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) 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. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We stratified the analysis by child mortality, and used GRADE to evaluate evidence quality. MAIN
resultsForty-one trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 186,263 participants. Twenty-nine trials (101,671 participants) assessed RV1, and 12 trials (84,592 participants) evaluated RV5. We did not find any trials assessing LLR.RV1Children aged less than one year: In countries with low-mortality rates, RV1 prevents 86% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.26; 40,631 participants, six trials; high-quality evidence), and, based on one large multicentre trial in Latin America and Finland, probably prevents 40% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.72; 17,867 participants, one trial; moderate-quality evidence). In countries with high-mortality rates, RV1 probably prevents 63% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.75; 5414 participants, two trials; moderate-quality evidence), and, based on one trial in Malawi and South Africa, 34% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.98; 4939 participants, one trial; moderate-quality evidence).Children aged up to two years: In countries with low-mortality rates, RV1 prevents 85% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.20; 32,854 participants, eight trials; high-quality evidence), and probably 37% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 39,091 participants, two trials; moderate-quality evidence). In countries with high-mortality rates, based on one trial in Malawi and South Africa, RV1 probably prevents 42% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.79; 2764 participants, one trial; moderate-quality evidence), and 18% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.95; 2764 participants, one trial; moderate-quality evidence).RV5Children aged less than one year: In countries with low-mortality rates, RV5 probably prevents 87% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.45; 2344 participants, three trials; moderate-quality evidence), and, based on one trial in Finland, may prevent 72% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.48; 1029 participants, one trial; low-quality evidence). In countries with high-mortality rates, RV5 prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62; 5916 participants, two trials; high-quality evidence), but there was insufficient data to assess the effect on severe all-cause diarrhoea.Children aged up to two years: Four studies provided data for severe rotavirus and all-cause diarrhoea in countries with low-mortality rates. Three trials reported on severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases and found that RV5 probably prevents 82% (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.50; 3190 participants, three trials; moderate-quality evidence), and another trial in Finland reported on severe all-cause diarrhoea cases and found that RV5 may prevent 96% (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.70; 1029 participants, one trial; low-quality evidence). In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 41% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; 5885 participants, two trials; high-quality evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; 5977 participants, two trials; high-quality evidence).There was no evidence of a vaccine effect on mortality (181,009 participants, 34 trials; low-quality evidence), although the trials were not powered to detect an effect on this end point.Serious adverse events were reported in 4565 out of 99,438 children vaccinated with RV1 and in 1884 out of 78,226 children vaccinated with RV5. Fifty-eight cases of intussusception were reported in 97,246 children after RV1 vaccination, and 34 cases in 81,459 children after RV5 vaccination. No significant difference was found between children receiving RV1 or RV5 and placebo in the number of serious adverse events, and intussusception in particular. AUTHORS'
conclusionsRV1 and RV5 prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. The vaccine efficacy is lower in high-mortality countries; however, due to the higher burden of disease, the absolute benefit is higher in these settings. No increased risk of serious adverse events including intussusception was detected, but post-introduction surveillance studies are required to detect rare events associated with vaccination.
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.