ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2018
Assessing the Effectiveness and Cost-Benefit of Test-and-Vaccinate Policy for Supplementary Vaccination against Rubella with Limited Doses.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors associated with participation in an ongoing national catch-up campaign against rubella: a cross-sectional internet survey among 1680 adult men in Japan.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Measles and Rubella during COVID-19 Pandemic: Future Challenges in Japan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Temporary Fertility Decline after Large Rubella Outbreak, Japan.Emerging infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Modelling a Supplementary Vaccination Program of Rubella Using the 2012⁻2013 Epidemic Data in Japan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Elevating herd immunity level against rubella is essential to prevent congenital rubella syndrome (CRS). Insufficient vaccination coverage left susceptible pockets among adults in Japan, and the outbreak of rubella from 2012 to 2013 resulted in 45 observed CRS cases. Given a limited stock of rubella-containing vaccine (RCV) available, the Japanese government recommended healthcare providers to prioritize vaccination to those confirmed with low level of immunity, or to those likely to transmit to pregnant women. Although a test-and-vaccinate policy could potentially help reduce the use of the limited stockpile of vaccines, by selectively elevating herd immunity, the cost of serological testing is generally high and comparable to the vaccine itself. Here, we aimed to examine whether random vaccination would be more cost-beneficial than the test-and-vaccinate strategy. A mathematical model was employed to evaluate the vaccination policy implemented in 2012-2013, quantifying the benefit-to-cost ratio to achieve herd immunity. The modelling exercise demonstrated that, while the test-and-vaccinate strategy can efficiently achieve herd immunity when stockpiles of RCV are limited, random vaccination would be a more cost-beneficial strategy. As long as the herd immunity acts as the goal of vaccination, our findings apply to future supplementary immunization strategy.
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.