Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25781031›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Impact of ten-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccination on invasive pneumococcal disease in Finnish children--a population-based study.

Jukka Jokinen, Hanna Rinta-Kokko, Lotta Siira, Arto A Palmu, Mikko J Virtanen, Hanna Nohynek, Anni Virolainen-Julkunen, Maija Toropainen, J Pekka Nuorti

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

62 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Frontiers in public health · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jukka JokinenDepartment of Vaccination and Immune Protection, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Hanna Rinta-KokkoDepartment of Vaccination and Immune Protection, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Lotta SiiraDepartment of Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Arto A PalmuDepartment of Vaccination and Immune Protection, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Mikko J VirtanenDepartment of Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Hanna NohynekDepartment of Vaccination and Immune Protection, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Anni Virolainen-JulkunenDepartment for Promotion of Welfare and Health, Ministry for Social Affairs and Health, Helsinki, Finland.
Maija ToropainenDepartment of Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
J Pekka NuortiDepartment of Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland; Department of Epidemiology, School of Health Sciences, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe ten-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV10) was introduced into the Finnish National Vaccination Program (NVP) in September 2010 with a 2+1 schedule (3, 5, 12 months) without catch-up vaccinations. We evaluated the direct and indirect effects of PCV10 on invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) among children ≤5 years of age during the first three years after NVP introduction.

methodsWe conducted a population-based, observational follow-up study. The cohort of vaccine-eligible children (all children born June 1, 2010 or later) was followed from 3 months of age until the end of 2013. For the indirect effect, another cohort of older children ineligible for PCV10 vaccination was followed from 2011 through 2013. Both cohorts were compared with season- and age-matched reference cohorts before NVP introduction. National, population-based laboratory surveillance data were used to compare culture-confirmed serotype-specific IPD rates in the vaccine target and reference cohorts by using Poisson regression models.

resultsThe overall IPD rate among vaccine-eligible children was reduced by 80% (95%CI 72 to 85); the reduction in vaccine-type IPD was 92% (95%CI 86 to 95). However, a non-significant increase in non-vaccine type IPD was observed. During 2012-2013, we also observed a 48% (95%CI 18 to 69) reduction in IPD among unvaccinated children 2 to 5 years of age, which was mostly attributable to the ten vaccine serotypes.

conclusionsThis is the first population-based study investigating the impact of PCV10 introduction without prior PCV7 use. A substantial decrease in IPD rates among vaccine-eligible children was observed. A smaller and temporally delayed reduction among older, unvaccinated children suggests that PCV10 also provides indirect protection against vaccine-type IPD. Changes in serotype distribution warrant continuous monitoring of potential increases in non-vaccine serotypes.

Indexed as

Case-Control StudiesChildChild, PreschoolFemaleFinlandHumansImmunologic Deficiency SyndromesInfantMalePneumococcal InfectionsPneumococcal VaccinesVaccination10-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccinePneumococcal Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID25781031
PMCPMC4364013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.