ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2020
Vaccine-related Anaphylaxis Cases Confirmed by KCDC from 2001-2016.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA national immunization program (NIP) to prevent disease and reduce mortality from vaccine preventable diseases (VPD) is very important.
methodsWe analyzed only the anaphylaxis cases that occurred between 2001 and 2016 that Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC) determined had a definite causal relationship with a vaccine. The clinical symptoms were assessed according to the Brighton Collaboration case definition (BCCD) level.
resultsDuring the period, there were 13 cases of vaccine-related anaphylaxis. The median age was 9 years (range, 1 month to 59 years). The incidence of anaphylaxis per million doses was 0.090 in 2005, 0.079 in 2012, 0.071 in 2013, 0.188 in 2015, and 0.036 in 2016. Of those cases, 23.1% were influenza vaccines, and 76.9% were BCCD level 2. Epinephrine was used in 46.2%.
conclusionVaccine-related anaphylaxis seems to have been very rare in the past, but health care professionals must always be aware of anaphylaxis.
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.