ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2021
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational analysis of the immunogenicity and safety of various types of spinal muscular atrophy vaccines.Inflammopharmacology · 2024Trial
- The impact of different IPV-OPV sequential immunization programs on hepatitis A and hepatitis B vaccine efficacy.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Trial
- A real-world based study for immunogenicity and safety for three immunization schedules of polio vaccine.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Immune persistence after different polio sequential immunization schedules in Chinese infants.NPJ vaccines · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the immunization effectiveness of bOPV booster immunization and IPV revaccination.NPJ vaccines · 2023Article
- The progress of postapproval clinical studies on Sabin IPV.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- Intranasal Immunization With a c-di-GMP-Adjuvanted Acellular Pertussis Vaccine Provides Superior Immunity AgainstFrontiers in immunology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA comparative analysis of the immunogenicity and safety of different poliovirus immunization schedules in Chinese infants is imperative to guide the administration of efficient strategies for the eradication of poliomyelitis.
methodsA
resultsIn a per-protocol set analysis, the tOPV-tOPV-tOPV schedule induced seroconversion in 99.1%, 98.2%, and 96.0% of the inoculated infants for poliovirus type I, II, and III, respectively. The seroconversions for poliovirus types I and III were each almost 100% after immunization with the cIPV-bOPV-bOPV, sIPV-sIPV-bOPV, cIPV-cIPV-bOPV, sIPV-sIPV-tOPV, cIPV-cIPV-tOPV, or sIPV-bOPV-bOPV schedule. However, the schedules that used one IPV dose followed by two (poliovirus type I and III) bOPV doses failed to induce high-level immunity against type II poliovirus. IPV-related schedules were associated with a slightly higher incidence of adverse events (AEs).
conclusionsIf the capacity of IPV can be increased, two or more doses of IPV should be administered before vaccination with bOPV in a sequential schedule to improve immunity against type II poliovirus.
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.