ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2021
Epidemiological changes in mumps infections between 1990 and 2017 in urban area of Shanghai, China.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epidemiological Characteristics of Mumps Under Different Immunization Strategies in Henan Province.Vaccines · 2026Article
- Assessment of mumps-containing vaccine effectiveness by dose during 2006 to 2020 in Quzhou, China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- Mumps serological surveillance following 10 years of a one-dose mumps-containing-vaccine policy in Fujian Province, China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- Spatial Effect of Ecological Environmental Factors on Mumps in China during 2014-2018.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Epidemiological features and sociodemographic factors associated with mumps in mainland China from 2004 to 2018.Journal of medical virology · 2022Article
- A Multi-Age-Group Interrupted Time-Series Study for Evaluating the Effectiveness of National Expanded Program on Immunization on Mumps.Vaccines · 2022Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
2-dose measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine was recommended for children in Shanghai in November 1996 and incorporated into Shanghai immunization program in December 2008. We described the mumps epidemiology and assessed impact of the 2-dose MMR vaccination in Changning district, Shanghai, 1990-2017. We obtained the MMR vaccination coverage for children born during 1995-2015 and examined the incidence and disease characteristics of mumps during 1990-2017. The 1st dose MMR coverage had maintained above 95% since 1999 birth cohort. The 2nd dose MMR coverage reached above 90% since 2006 birth cohort. A total of 13,388 cases were reported during 1990-2017. The incidence decreased from 315.2 per 100,000 population in 1990 to 8.8 per 100,000 population in 2017. Of the 13,388 cases, 7585 (56.7%) were male and 91.7% were 1-14 years of age and 86.8% were children in kindergartens and students in schools. Compared with 1990-1996, the incidence had a significant decrease in 0-4 and ≥15 years in 1997-2008 and in all age groups in 2009-2017. A later birth cohort was associated with a lower incidence in children covered by MMR vaccination. In Conclusions, the incidence of mumps has dramatically declined with high coverage of 2-dose MMR in Changning district, Shanghai. Children in kindergartens and schools are still the most affected populations. An increase in incidence in adults has not occurred after 20 years of MMR vaccination. Long-term surveillance is needed to fully evaluate the impact of MMR vaccination policy.
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.