ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2018
Response to third rubella vaccine dose.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term trends in rubella incidence across various regions and age groups in China, 2004-2021.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Limited data exist on the immunogenicity of a third dose of the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR). In this study, our aim was to evaluate the long-term rubella immunogenicity afforded by two childhood MMR doses of the Norwegian vaccination program in a cohort of conscripts and to determine the effect of an additional dose of MMR vaccine, in order to inform vaccination policy. Blood samples from Norwegian conscripts (n = 495) taken both before and eight months after administration of a dose of MMR vaccine were tested using an enzyme immunoassay to measure anti-rubella IgG. Concentrations <5 IU/mL were regarded as negative, 5.0-9.9 IU/mL as equivocal, and ≥10 IU/mL as positive. Overall, the seropositivity before vaccination was 84.6%, and 99.0% of the conscripts had anti-rubella IgG concentrations ≥5 IU/mL. The seropositivity after vaccination was 94.5%, and 99.8% of the conscripts had antibody concentrations ≥5 IU/mL. The geometrical mean IgG concentrations increased from 21.4 IU/mL before vaccination to 28.9 IU/mL after. Four out of five conscripts, with seronegative concentrations before administrations of an additional MMR dose, had equivocal or seropositive results following vaccination. The cohort of young adults in Norway, which was eligible for two childhood MMR doses, was protected against rubella, and efforts should be made to maintain high vaccine coverage to ensure immunity in the future. A third dose of MMR administered in early adulthood led to an increase in the antibody concentration in our cohort and seroconversion for the majority of seronegative persons.
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.