SynthesisHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2021
Effectiveness of varicella vaccine as post-exposure prophylaxis: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Analysis of sero-epidemiological characteristics of varicella in healthy children in Wuxi, China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Article
- Article
- Effectiveness of two-dose vs. one-dose varicella vaccine in children in Shanghai, China: a prospective cohort study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the effectiveness of varicella vaccine (VarV) as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) among children during varicella outbreaks. MATERIAL AND
methodsA comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SinoMed, Wanfang and CNKI. Relevant outcomes included the incidence of varicella. Pooled estimates were calculated using a fixed-effects or random-effects model according to the heterogeneity among studies.
resultsA total of 15 studies with 7,474 children that received one or two dosages of VarV as PEP and 183,827 children who received no VarV were included in the meta-analysis. In total, one-dose and two-dose VarV as PEP had 43% (95% confidence interval (CI):27%, 55%) and 60% (95%CI: 35%, 75%) efficacy, respectively. When PEP was applied within 3 days, the pooled VarV as PEP for prevention of varicella was 80% (95%CI: 68%, 88%); when PEP was administered beyond 3 days, the pooled VarV as PEP for the prevention of varicella was 50% (95%CI: 11%, 72%). If the PEP was implemented with a coverage of more than 80%, the VarV could prevent 82% of varicella cases from occurring (95%CI: 15%, 96%); if the PEP covered a maximum of 80% of the susceptible cases, the VarV could prevent 65% of varicella cases from occurring (95%CI: 50%, 76%).
conclusionThe two-dose VarV had better efficacy than one-dose VarV in the control of varicella outbreaks, especially if PEP was applied within 3 days of an outbreak and in conjunction with a high coverage rate ≥80%.
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.