Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35184924›Full record

SynthesisVaccine2022

The efficacy and safety of rotavirus vaccines in countries in Africa and Asia with high child mortality.

N Henschke, H Bergman, D Hungerford, N A Cunliffe, R F Grais, G Kang, U D Parashar, S A Wang, K M Neuzil

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Vaccine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

N HenschkeCochrane Response, United Kingdom.
H BergmanCochrane Response, United Kingdom.
D HungerfordThe Centre for Global Vaccine Research, Institute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom; NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Gastrointestinal Infections, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
N A CunliffeThe Centre for Global Vaccine Research, Institute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom; NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Gastrointestinal Infections, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
R F GraisEpicentre, Paris, France.
G KangChristian Medical College, Vellore, India.
U D ParasharCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA.
S A WangWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
K M NeuzilUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA.
Cochrane · GBCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USChristian Medical College & Hospital · INHealth Protection Research Unit in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · USWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rotavirus remains a leading cause of diarrhoeal morbidity and mortality in young children and rotavirus vaccines are critical for reducing global disease burden. This report addresses the performance of rotavirus vaccines in countries with high child mortality. We performed a sensitivity analysis as part of a systematic review on rotavirus vaccines to inform development of World Health Organization vaccine recommendations. The efficacy of four prequalified vaccines against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis was similar across high mortality settings in Asia and Africa. Within the first year following vaccination, vaccine efficacy for the four vaccines ranged from 48% to 57% while in the second year, efficacy ranged from 29% to 54%. The four vaccines showed no increase in intussusception risk in these settings. All four vaccines appear to prevent significant numbers of severe rotavirus gastroenteritis episodes with no measurable increase in intussusception risk in high mortality settings in Africa and Asia.

Indexed as

RotavirusRotavirus InfectionsRotavirus VaccinesAfricaChildChild MortalityChild, PreschoolHumansInfantRotavirus VaccinesEfficacyRotavirus

Identifiers

PMID35184924
PMCPMC8914343
OpenAlexW4212904989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.