ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2021
How adequate is measles surveillance in the United States? Investigations of measles-like illness, 2010-2017.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2021. 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.
- Mobility between communities can reduce the impact of measles intervention during an outbreak: a mathematical modeling study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Given the availability of an effective and safe vaccine, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that global measles eradication is achievable, and measles elimination goals have since been established as interim steps toward eradication. As part of a strategy to maintain elimination, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) and WHO stipulate a minimum annual reporting rate of discarded non-measles cases of ≥2 per 100,000 population, in order to ensure sensitive surveillance and adequate investigative effort. With its effective vaccination program, the United States in 2000 was among the first countries to verify elimination, although subsequently, it has not routinely reported discarded rates. We estimated MLI investigation rates among insured individuals during 2010-2017, using data from the MarketScan® databases. We defined "MLI investigations" as measles serologic testing within 5 days following diagnostic codes for measles-compatible symptoms and conditions. We provide a rationale for pre-specifying three subgroups for analysis: children aged ≤15 years; males aged 16-22 years excluding data from summer months; and males aged ≥23 years. MLI investigation rates ranged from 6.6─26.4 per 100,000, remaining stable over time except during the 2015 measles outbreaks when rates increased, particularly among young children. In addition to high vaccine uptake, measles elimination requires ongoing vigilance by clinicians and high-quality, case-based surveillance. Estimated rates of MLI investigations in this U.S. population suggesting that the quality of measles surveillance is sufficiently sensitive to detect endemic measles circulation if it were to be occurring.
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.