Epidemiologic and clinical implications of second-generation pneumococcal conjugate vaccines.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Long-Term Serological Response to 13-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine Versus 23-Valent Polysaccharide Vaccine in HIV-Infected Adults.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2019
   Article
2. Cost-effectiveness of childhood pneumococcal vaccination program in Ethiopia: results from a quasi-experimental evaluation.BMC public health · 2019
   Article
3. Immunogenicity and Safety of the 13-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine versus the 23-Valent Polysaccharide Vaccine in Unvaccinated HIV-Infected Adults: A Pilot, Prospective Controlled Study.PloS one · 2016
   Article
4. Dissecting the indirect effects caused by vaccines into the basic elements.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2015
   Review

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract