Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30629620›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Invasive pneumococcal diseases in children and adults before and after introduction of the 10-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine into the Austrian national immunization program.

Lukas Richter, Daniela Schmid, Elisabeth Eva Kanitz, Ines Zwazl, Eva Pöllabauer, Joanna Jasinska, Heinz Burgmann, Michael Kundi, Ursula Wiedermann

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lukas RichterDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6982-6239
Daniela SchmidDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety, Vienna, Austria.
Elisabeth Eva KanitzDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety, Vienna, Austria.
Ines ZwazlInstitute of Specific Prophylaxis and Tropical Medicine, Center for Pathophysiology, Infectiology and Immunology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Eva PöllabauerInstitute of Specific Prophylaxis and Tropical Medicine, Center for Pathophysiology, Infectiology and Immunology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Joanna JasinskaInstitute of Specific Prophylaxis and Tropical Medicine, Center for Pathophysiology, Infectiology and Immunology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Heinz BurgmannGeneral Hospital, AKH, Vienna, Austria.
Michael KundiInstitute of Environmental Health, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Ursula WiedermannInstitute of Specific Prophylaxis and Tropical Medicine, Center for Pathophysiology, Infectiology and Immunology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-1302-3223
Medical University of Vienna · ATAustrian Agency for Health and Food Safety · ATVienna General Hospital · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn February 2012 the ten-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV10) with a 2+1 doses schedule (3, 5, 12 or 14 months of age) without catch-up vaccination was introduced in Austria. We assessed direct and indirect vaccine effects on invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) by a population-based intervention study.

methodsThe study period was divided into pre- (2009-2011) and post-period (2013-2017, February), regarding 2012 as transition year. Outcomes were defined as PCV10 ST-IPD, the PCV10-related ST 6A and 19A IPD and non-PCV10 excluding ST 6A-/19A-IPD (NVT-IPD). We used national surveillance data and compared average monthly incidence rate (IR) between pre- and post-period among <5, 5-49 and ≥50 years old. Additionally, for the 5-49 and ≥50 years old, and the 50-59 and ≥60 years old, we analyzed monthly incidence data of the pre-, post-period, and estimated trend and level changes by using a segmented time-series regression.

resultsThe PCV-10 IPD was reduced by 58% (95% CI: 30%; 74%) and 67% (95% CI: 32%; 84%) among <5 and ≥50 years old; the reduction in ≥60 years was 71% (95% CI: 36%; 88%). There were no significant changes in the pre-post-rate or incidence trend of NVT-IPD in the <5 and ≥50 years old. ST-specific analyses revealed no ST 6A- and ST 19A IPD decline in any age-group, and a ST 8 IPD increase among ≥50 years old (IR ratio: 3.5; 95% CI: 1.7; 7.2). We found no vaccine effects among 5-49 years old.

conclusionsOur study adds to the evidence on direct and indirect protection of a childhood PCV10 vaccine program. Elderlies seem to benefit the most. Findings did not support PCV 10 cross-protection, but indicate replacement at least for ST 8 among the ≥50 years old. Follow-up analyses of IPD surveillance data are needed to fully characterize the magnitude of serotype replacement and further vaccine-attributable IPD reduction with time.

Indexed as

Program EvaluationAdolescentAdultAge FactorsAustriaChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansImmunization ProgramsImmunization ScheduleIncidenceInfantMaleMiddle AgedPneumococcal Infections10-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccinePneumococcal VaccinesVaccines, Conjugate

Identifiers

PMID30629620
PMCPMC6328268
OpenAlexW2910530611

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.