ArticleVaccine: X2023
Post-marketing safety surveillance of the rotavirus vaccine in India.
Article in Vaccine: X, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the Impact of Rotavirus Vaccination in Iranian Children Under Five: An Agent-Based Modelling Approach.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Clinical and Epidemiological Characteristics and Rotavirus Vaccination Status in Children Aged Under 2 Years Hospitalized with Intussusception in Kerala, India, 2019-2022: A Multicenter Observational Study.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2025Observational
- Epidemiological and Clinical Characteristics of Intussusception in Children Aged Under 2 Years: Comparison of the Southern and Western States in India, 2019-2022.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2025Observational
- Rotavirus Reverse Genetics Systems and Oral Vaccine Delivery Vectors for Mucosal Vaccination.Microorganisms · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: ROTASIIL, an oral live attenuated bovine-human reassortant pentavalent rotavirus vaccine, was approved in 2017. This post-marketing surveillance (PMS) was conducted to collect real-world data on the safety of ROTASIIL in India. Methods: Observational, active PMS was conducted in approximately 10,000 infants aged ≥ 6 weeks. ROTASIIL was administered as a 3-dose regimen, at least 4 weeks apart, beginning at ≥ 6 weeks of age concomitantly with other Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) vaccines. Participants were followed for one month after the last dose. The adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs), including intussusception (IS) reported during the follow up period were collected. Findings: A total of 9940 infants were enrolled and were considered for safety analysis. Around 9913 (99.7 %) infants received 2 doses, while 9893 (99.5 %) infants completed all three doses. Total 3693 AEs were reported in 2516 (25.3 %) participants. Most of these AEs were pyrexia (78.01 % of events) and injection-site reactions (19.14 % of events). Nearly all AEs were causally unrelated to orally administered ROTASIIL and could be caused by the concomitant injectable vaccines. Only 4 AEs (2 events of vomiting and 1 event each of discomfort and pyrexia) in 4 (<0.1 %) participants could be related to ROTASIIL. AEs were of mild or moderate severity and all resolved without any sequelae. A total of 2 SAEs (acute otitis media and skull fracture) were reported in 2 (<0.1 %) participants and were not related to ROTASIIL and recovered without sequelae. No case of IS was reported. Interpretation: ROTASIIL was safe and well tolerated in this study. No safety concerns were reported. Funding: The study was funded by SIIPL which is the manufacturer of the study product.
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.