ArticleThe Journal of infectious diseases2025
Global Impact of Mass Vaccination Campaigns on Circulating Type 2 Vaccine-Derived Poliovirus Outbreaks: An Interrupted Time-Series Analysis.
Article in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBetween 2016 and 2023, 3248 cases of circulating vaccine-derived type 2 poliomyelitis (cVDPV2) were reported globally and supplementary immunization activities (SIAs) with monovalent type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (mOPV2) and novel type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (nOPV2) targeted an estimated 356 and 525 million children, respectively. This analysis estimates the community-level impact of nOPV2 relative to mOPV2 SIAs.
methodsWe fitted interrupted time-series regressions to surveillance data between January 2016 and November 2023 to estimate the impact of nOPV2 and mOPV2 SIAs on cVDPV2 poliomyelitis incidence and prevalence in environmental surveillance across 37 countries, directly comparing the impact of SIAs in 13 countries where both vaccines were used.
resultsWe did not find any statistically significant differences between nOPV2 and mOPV2 SIA impact except for in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where nOPV2 SIAs had lower impact (adjusted relative risk [aRR] for cVDPV2 poliomyelitis incidence per nOPV2 SIA, 0.505; 95% confidence interval [CI], .409-.623) compared to mOPV2 (aRR, 0.193; 95% CI, .137-.272); P value for difference in RRs = 3e-6.
conclusionsWe find variation in OPV2 SIA impacts globally, with greater certainty about Nigeria and DRC, where large outbreaks provided an opportunity to assess impact at scale. In most countries, we find no significant difference between nOPV2 and mOPV2 SIA impact. We are unable to identify the reason for the significant difference in DRC, which could include differential SIA coverage, timing, vaccine effectiveness, or outbreak dynamics.
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.