Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41042511›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2025

Comparison of 2 Doses vs 1 Dose in the First Season Children Are Vaccinated Against Influenza: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Jessie J Goldsmith, Sarah Tavlian, Christy Vu, Annette K Regan, Patricia Therese Campbell, Sheena G Sullivan

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Influenza vaccine effectiveness against outpatient acute respiratory illness with laboratory-confirmed influenza, United States, 2024-25 season.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Error in Byline.JAMA network open · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jessie J GoldsmithDepartment of Infectious Diseases, University of Melbourne, at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, Australia.
Sarah TavlianDepartment of Infectious Diseases, University of Melbourne, at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, Australia.
Christy VuDepartment of Infectious Diseases, University of Melbourne, at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, Australia.
Annette K ReganDepartment of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, California.
Patricia Therese CampbellDepartment of Infectious Diseases, University of Melbourne, at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, Australia.
Sheena G SullivanDepartment of Epidemiology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Based on the findings of immunogenicity studies, the World Health Organization has recommended influenza vaccine-naive children younger than 9 years receive 2 doses of influenza vaccine in the first year of vaccination. Objective: To estimate the increase in protection associated with the second dose of influenza vaccine for influenza vaccine-naive children younger than 9 years. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched for articles published from inception to March 24, 2025. Study Selection: Peer-reviewed studies that reported vaccine efficacy or vaccine effectiveness against influenza for influenza vaccine-naive children aged 6 months to younger than 9 years by dose number were included. Modeling and cost-effectiveness studies were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data and assessed studies' risk of bias. The study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: For studies reporting both 1 and 2 dose estimates, the difference in vaccine efficacy or effectiveness was calculated in order to estimate the additional protection associated with the second dose. Pooled vaccine efficacy or effectiveness and difference were calculated separately for inactivated influenza and live attenuated influenza vaccines. Results: There were 51 studies with 415 050 participants included in this analysis. The pooled absolute increase in vaccine effectiveness of a second inactivated influenza vaccine dose in the first year of vaccination was 15 percentage points (pp) (95% CI, -2.8 pp to 33 pp) for those younger than 9 years and 28 pp (95% CI, 4.7 pp to 51 pp) for children younger than 3 years. Insufficient estimates were available to assess the incremental benefit associated with a second dose of live attenuated influenza vaccine. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of influenza vaccine efficacy and effectiveness in the first year of vaccination, receiving 2 doses of inactivated influenza vaccine was associated with improved protection for children younger than 3 years compared with those who receive one dose; however, when the age range was broadened to younger than 9 years, the second dose of inactivated influenza vaccine was not significantly associated with increased protection. Additional high-quality studies are needed to assess the impact of the 2-dose schedule for both vaccine types by age to determine the age range for which a 2-dose schedule is beneficial.

Indexed as

Immunization ScheduleInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesVaccinationVaccine EfficacyChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantMaleInfluenza Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID41042511
PMCPMC12495502

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.