Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29680993›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2018

Effectiveness of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine in the 2015/2016 season as assessed in both a test-negative case-control study design and a traditional case-control study design.

Takahisa Kimiya, Masayoshi Shinjoh, Makoto Anzo, Hiroki Takahashi, Shinichiro Sekiguchi, Norio Sugaya, Takao Takahashi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

7 authors.

Takahisa KimiyaDepartment of Pediatrics, Tokyo Metropolitan Ohtsuka Hospital, 2-8-1 Minamiohtsuka, Toshima-ku, Tokyo, 170-8476, Japan. kimiya0920@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9585-6052
Masayoshi ShinjohDepartment of Pediatrics, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Makoto AnzoDepartment of Pediatrics, Tokyo Metropolitan Ohtsuka Hospital, 2-8-1 Minamiohtsuka, Toshima-ku, Tokyo, 170-8476, Japan.
Hiroki TakahashiDepartment of Pediatrics, Tokyo Metropolitan Ohtsuka Hospital, 2-8-1 Minamiohtsuka, Toshima-ku, Tokyo, 170-8476, Japan.
Shinichiro SekiguchiDepartment of Pediatrics, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Norio SugayaDepartment of Pediatrics, Keiyu Hospital, 3-7-3 Minatomirai, Nishi-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa, Japan.
Takao TakahashiDepartment of Pediatrics, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Both traditional case-control studies (TCCSs) and test-negative case-control studies (TNCCSs) are commonly used to assess influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE). To compensate for the fact that observational studies are susceptible to bias, we combined both methods to assess VE in one geographical area during the 2015/2016 season, when influenza A (H1N1)pdm was dominant. Our TNCCS covered 331 children aged 6 months to 15 years who visited our hospital with fever, including 182 with influenza, and our TCCS covered 812 pediatric outpatients aged 6 months to 15 years, including 214 with influenza. Influenza infection and vaccination history were reviewed, and VE was calculated as (1 - odds ratio) × 100. In the TNCCS, VE against influenza A was 68% (95% CI 47-81) overall, and 70% (48-83) for those given two doses; against influenza B, VE was 37% (- 12-64) overall and 49% (2-74) for two doses. In the TCCS, VE against influenza A was 44% (15-63) overall and 44% (13-64) for two doses, and VE against influenza B was 24% (- 19-52) overall and 41% (3-64) for two doses.

conclusionBoth studies confirmed significant VE against influenza A, significant two-dose VE against influenza B, and better two-dose VE than one-dose VE. What is Known: • Influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) varies from year to year. • Observational studies are conventionally used for VE assessment. However, they are inherently susceptible to bias and confounding. What is New: • This is the first report of influenza VE assessment using more than one observational study and performed in a specific area during the same season. • VE estimates obtained in our traditional case-control study were lower than those in our test-negative case-control study, but both studies found significant VE against influenza.

Indexed as

AdolescentCase-Control StudiesChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesMaleOrthomyxoviridaeTokyoInfluenza Vaccines2015/2016 seasonInactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccineInfluenza vaccine effectivenessTest-negative case-control studyTraditional case-control study

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.