ArticleNature communications2025
Natural immune boosting biases pertussis infection estimates in seroprevalence studies.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying the impact of vaccination on pertussis dynamics in Sweden.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Global patterns of pertussis incidence and vaccination strategies: implications of divergent surveillance data.NPJ vaccines · 2026Article
- Natural immune boosting biases pertussis infection estimates in seroprevalence studies.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Leaky or polarised immunity: Non-Markovian modelling highlights the impact of immune memory assumptions.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Seroepidemiology has significant potential for uncovering the unreported burden of infectious diseases. However, for diseases without well-defined serological correlates of protection, natural immune boosting-whereby pathogen exposure triggers a detectable immune response without causing a transmissible infection-can complicate the interpretation of serosurveys. This issue is relevant to pertussis, a vaccine-preventable disease that remains a significant public health concern worldwide. Here, we aimed to evaluate the reliability of pertussis serosurveys using a transmission model that tracked the dynamics of pertussis infection, natural immune boosting, and seroprevalence. By fitting this model to seroprevalence data from the late whole-cell pertussis vaccine era in six European countries, we estimated that protection against infection conferred by natural infection or vaccination was variable but lasted, on average, for several decades. We then predicted the positive predictive value (PPV) of seropositivity in serosurveys among adults across twelve countries that broadly captured transmission patterns worldwide. Overall, we predicted a low PPV across multiple scenarios, especially in adults aged 20-39 years, where it typically dropped below 50%. Thus, although serosurveys are unquestionably useful for quantifying pertussis exposure levels, the common interpretation of seroprevalence as a measure of recent infections may lead to overestimating pertussis circulation and underestimating the impact of pertussis vaccines.
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.