ReviewVaccines2023
Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Persons Aged 15-64 Years: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Vaccines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Repeated influenza vaccination results in blunting rather than back-boosting of antibody responses against A(H3N2) antigens.Research square · 2026Article
- Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Korea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Real-World Evidence from the Past Decade.Vaccines · 2026Review
- Article
- An mRNA vaccine candidate encoding cholera toxin subunit B and conserved antigens of influenza viruses confers cross-protection against influenza a viruses in adult and aged mice.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Interim Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza and Hospitalization, Republic of Korea, 2024-2025 (HIMM Network).Vaccines · 2025Article
- Mechanistic insights into the small-molecule inhibition of influenza A virus entry.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Construction and Immune Strategy Optimization of a Vaccine Strain for Influenza A (H5N8) Subtype.Viruses · 2025Article
- Early and Late Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in South Korea During the 2023-2024 Season.Vaccines · 2025Article
- Vaccination Promotion Strategies in the Elderly: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Vaccines · 2024Review
- Neuraminidase Antibody Response to Homologous and Drifted Influenza A Viruses After Immunization with Seasonal Influenza Vaccines.Vaccines · 2024Article
- Cytomegalovirus vaccine vector-induced effector memory CD4 + T cells protect cynomolgus macaques from lethal aerosolized heterologous avian influenza challenge.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Advances in Nucleic Acid Universal Influenza Vaccines.Vaccines · 2024Review
- Heterogeneity of influenza infection at precise scale in Yinchuan, Northwest China, 2012-2022: evidence from Joinpoint regression and spatiotemporal analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Influenza is a respiratory disease caused by the influenza virus, which is highly transmissible in humans. This paper presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and test-negative designs (TNDs) to assess the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of seasonal influenza vaccines (SIVs) in humans aged 15 to 64 years. An electronic search to identify all relevant studies was performed. The outcome measure of interest was VE on laboratory-confirmed influenza (any strain). Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for TNDs. The search identified a total of 2993 records, but only 123 studies from 73 papers were included in the meta-analysis. Of these studies, 9 were RCTs and 116 were TNDs. The pooled VE was 48% (95% CI: 42-54) for RCTs, 55.4% (95% CI: 43.2-64.9) when there was a match between the vaccine and most prevalent circulating strains and 39.3% (95% CI: 23.5-51.9) otherwise. The TNDs' adjusted VE was equal to 39.9% (95% CI: 31-48), 45.1 (95% CI: 38.7-50.8) when there was a match and 35.1 (95% CI: 29.0-40.7) otherwise. The match between strains included in the vaccine and strains in circulation is the most important factor in the VE. It increases by more than 25% when there is a match with the most prevalent circulating strains. The laboratorial method for confirmation of influenza is a possible source of bias when estimating VE.
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.