ArticleEpidemiology and infection2025
A new approach to define the optimal immunization strategy against pneumococcal disease: the example of Canada.
Article in Epidemiology and infection, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
New-generation pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) are available to replace PCV-13 for childhood and adult immunization. Besides cost-effectiveness evaluations which have highly variable results, the comparative immunogenicity of these new vaccines (PCV15, PCV20, PCV21) and their coverage of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) and carriage strains in different age-groups should be regarded as well as the antibody susceptibility, antibiotic resistance, invasiveness and virulence of serotypes included in each vaccine. Based on the Canadian experience, these topics are discussed. The optimal strategy would be a 2+1 PCV20 schedule for children, PCV21 for elderly adults and a dual PCV20+PCV21 schedule for adults at very high IPD risk. Shifting from PCV-13 to PCV-15 for children entails a risk of increased IPD incidence in adults because additional serotypes are of low virulence and could be replaced by more invasive and virulent serotypes. This risk can be reasonably excluded if PCV-20 replaces PCV-13 as the former covers additional serotypes being highly invasive and virulent. It is recognized that off-label use of PCV-20 according to a 2+1 schedule could be problematic for some jurisdictions as this is not authorized in all countries. In Canada, however, the 2+1 PCV20 schedule was authorized based on the same dataset submitted elsewhere.
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.