ArticleF1000Research2020
Adverse events following measles-mumps-rubella-varicella vaccine: an independent perspective on Italian pharmacovigilance data.
Article in F1000Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The WHO Algorithm for Causality Assessment of Adverse Effects Following Immunization with Genetic-Based Anti-COVID-19 Vaccines: Pitfalls and Suggestions for Improvement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Surveillance of adverse events following varicella vaccine immunization in Jiangsu province, China from 2017 to 2023.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Immune Response and Molecular Mechanisms of Cardiovascular Adverse Effects of Spike Proteins from SARS-CoV-2 and mRNA Vaccines.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Epidemiological study of adverse events following immunization in under 5 year children.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vaccine surveillance programs are crucial for the analysis of the vaccine's safety profile and the guidance of health policies. The Epidemiological Observatory of the Italian Apulia Region carried out an active surveillance program of adverse effects following immunization (AEFI) after the first dose of the measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) vaccine, finding 462 AEFIs per 1000 doses, with 11% rated serious. Applying the World Health Organization (WHO) causality assessment algorithm, 38 serious AEFIs/1000 enrolled were classified as 'consistent causal associations' with MMRV immunization. Severe hyperpyrexia, neurological symptoms and gastrointestinal diseases occurred in 38, 20 and 15 cases/1000 enrolled, respectively. A projection of such AEFIs in an Italian birth cohort would give tens of thousands of serious AEFIs. These incidence data are much greater than the incidence of serious AEFIs reported by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) for years 2017 and 2018, mainly based on passive (or mixed) pharmacovigilance. In a previous epidemiological study in the same Italian Region, during an eight year passive surveillance, the reporting rate of serious AEFI was 0.06/1000 doses, and no cases of febrile seizures were detected applying the WHO algorithm. Taken together, the data suggest that passive pharmacovigilance is utterly inadequate to document the real incidence of serious AEFIs and that current methods of assessing causality may be questioned. Active surveillance programs are required in representative population samples, with results presented separately from those of spontaneous reporting, and causality assessment should be performed carefully and using a correct technique for AEFIs presenting as complex and multifactorial diseases, like those with serious neurologic disorders.
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.