ReviewVaccines2020
Immunogenicity of Alternative Dosing Schedules for HPV Vaccines among Adolescent Girls and Young Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Vaccines, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Non-inferior antibody levels for HPV16/18 after extended two-dose schedules compared with a six-month interval: findings of a systematic review and meta-analysis.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Pooled it
- A literature review and evidence-based evaluation of the Dutch national immunisation schedule yield possibilities for improvements.Vaccine: X · 2024Review
- A Framework for Cervical Cancer Elimination in Low-and-Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review and Roadmap for Interventions and Research Priorities.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Alternative dosing schedules for licensed human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccines, particularly single dose and extended intervals between doses (>12 months), are being considered to address vaccine shortages and improve operational flexibility. We searched PUBMED/MEDLINE for publications reporting immunogenicity data following administration of one of the licensed HPV vaccines (2vHPV, 4vHPV, and 9vHPV) to females aged 9-26 years. We conducted non-inferiority analyses comparing alternative to standard schedules using mixed effects meta-regression controlling for baseline HPV status and disaggregated by vaccine, subtype, time point, and age group (9-14 and 15-26 years). Non-inferiority was defined as the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the geometric mean titer (GMT) ratio being greater than 0.5. Our search returned 2464 studies, of which 23 were included in data analyses. When evaluated against standard schedules, although robust immunogenicity was demonstrated across all multi-dose groups, non-inferiority of extended interval dosing was mixed across vaccines, subtypes, and time points. Single dose did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in any comparisons. Sparse data limited the number of possible comparisons, and further research is warranted.
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.