Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30570424›Full record

ReviewExpert opinion on drug safety2019

Approaches to monitoring intussusception following rotavirus vaccination.

Jacqueline E Tate, Umesh D Parashar

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Expert opinion on drug safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jacqueline E Tatea Viral Gastroenteritis Branch, Division of Viral Diseases , National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta , USA.
Umesh D Parashara Viral Gastroenteritis Branch, Division of Viral Diseases , National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta , USA.
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn 1998, the first licensed rotavirus vaccine was associated with intussusception, an unexpected adverse event, following reports of this condition to an adverse event reporting system. This rotavirus vaccine was withdrawn from the market and newer rotavirus vaccines have been extensively evaluated for an association with intussusception. AREAS COVERED: We review the different study designs that have been used both pre- and post-licensure to evaluate the association of rotavirus vaccines with intussusception and discuss the pros and cons of each design. Each of these study designs has their own strengths and weaknesses and the choice of the design often depends on the objective and the timing of the study and the resources available. For post-licensure monitoring of rotavirus vaccines, the self-controlled case-series design has become the most commonly used design to monitor this association. EXPERT OPINION: Use of this common study design has enabled comparison of findings across diverse settings. As new rotavirus vaccines enter the market, use of the self-controlled case-series design will enable examination of this association in a timely manner.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsHumansIntussusceptionResearch DesignRotavirus InfectionsRotavirus VaccinesVaccinationRotavirus Vaccinesadverse event following immunizationintussusceptionrotavirusRotavirus vaccine

Identifiers

PMID30570424
PMCPMC8845486
OpenAlexW2906004584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.