Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38345050›Full record

ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2024

Rupali J Limaye, Prachi Singh, Berhaun Fesshaye, Clarice Lee, Jessica Schue, Ruth A Karron

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rupali J LimayeDepartment of International Health, Department of Epidemiology, Department of Health, Behavior & Society, International Vaccine Access Center, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3883-9720
Prachi SinghDepartment of International Health, International Vaccine Access Center, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Berhaun FesshayeDepartment of International Health, International Vaccine Access Center, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Clarice LeeDepartment of International Health, International Vaccine Access Center, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Jessica SchueDepartment of International Health, International Vaccine Access Center, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Ruth A KarronDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Group B streptococcus (GBS) is a leading global cause of neonatal sepsis and meningitis, stillbirth, and puerperal sepsis. While intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) is a currently available GBS disease prevention strategy, IAP is programmatically complex to implement, precluding use in low- and middle-income countries. In Kenya, 2% of stillbirths are attributable to GBS infection. Two maternal GBS vaccines are in late-stage clinical development. However, licensure of a maternal GBS vaccine does not translate into reduction of disease. We conducted 28 in-depth interviews with pregnant people, lactating people, and community members across two counties in Kenya to better understand the attitudes and informational needs of primary vaccine beneficiaries. We identified two emerging themes from the data. The first focused on antecedents to maternal GBS vaccine acceptability. The most common antecedents focused on the vaccine's ability to protect the baby and/or the mother, followed by community sensitization before the vaccine was available. The second key theme focused on questions that would need to be addressed before someone could accept a maternal GBS vaccine. Three key categories of questions were identified, including vaccine safety compared to vaccine benefits, who gets the vaccine, and how the vaccine works. Realizing the potential benefits of a future GBS maternal vaccine will require a multifactorial approach, including ensuring that communities are aware of GBS-related harms as well as the safety and effectiveness of a maternal GBS vaccine. Our study contributes to informing this multifactorial approach by elucidating the attitudes and concerns of key populations.

Indexed as

Pregnancy Complications, InfectiousStreptococcal InfectionsStreptococcal VaccinesFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornKenyaLactationPregnancyPregnant PeopleStillbirthStreptococcal Vaccinesgroup B streptococcusKenyalactating womenmaternal immunizationPregnant women

Identifiers

PMID38345050
PMCPMC10863339
OpenAlexW4391746392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.