ReviewClinical and experimental vaccine research2025
Safety and efficacy of maternal RSV vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Clinical and experimental vaccine research, 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.
- Global vaccine development.Nature medicine · 2026Review
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
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) maternal vaccination has emerged as a preventive strategy to confer passive immunity to newborn during their early vulnerable months of life. In this review, we aim to assess the efficacy and safety of maternal RSV vaccines. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Our literature search covered MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. We included randomized controlled trial (RCTs) that assessed the safety and efficacy of maternal RSV vaccines. The overall effect estimates for efficacy outcomes, including RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI), severe LRTI, and hospitalizations, demonstrated statistically significant benefits favoring the maternal RSV vaccine group (risk ratio [RR], 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31, 0.62, p=0.0001; RR, 0.30, 95% CI, 0.19, 0.48, p=0.0001; RR, 0.53, 95% CI, 0.37, 0.75, p=0.0004, respectively). Additionally, no statistically significant differences were identified for fetal or neonatal safety outcomes, including congenital abnormalities, intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth, or infant death. Regarding preterm birth, the overall effect estimate did not show a significant difference between the vaccine and control groups (RR, 1.16, 95% CI, 0.96, 1.41, p=0.12). Maternal RSV vaccination provides protection against RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness in infants with no major safety concerns. However, current evidence remains limited, and additional data from high-quality RCTs are required to confirm or refute these findings. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42024541771.
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.