SynthesisJMIR public health and surveillance2025
Safety and Efficacy of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccination in Older Adults: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) membrane protein F has become one of the major target proteins for RSV vaccine development, previous studies have identified safety issues with RSV vaccines in older adults. The causes of these issues remain unclear. Objective: We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel RSV preF vaccine in preventing lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) and RSV-associated acute respiratory illnesses (RSV-ARIs) in older adults. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials from 5 databases-PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Randomized Controlled Trials-published up to July 31, 2024. For categorical variables, we used the risk ratio; for continuous variables, we used the weighted mean difference or standardized mean difference. We extracted key study characteristics and assessed their quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the impact of individual studies on pooled effects, and publication bias was examined with Egger and Begg tests. Results: Meta-analysis of 5 studies (101,825 older adults) showed a reduced LRTI incidence in the vaccinated group, with heterogeneity resolved after excluding 1 study. Analysis of 4 studies (99,931 participants) confirmed a lower RSV-ARI incidence with no heterogeneity. Safety analysis (14 studies, 76,695 participants) showed higher adverse events (AEs) in the vaccinated group, mainly injection-site reactions and vaccine-related AEs, but no significant difference in serious AEs. Subgroup analyses identified potential sources of AE heterogeneity, and sensitivity analyses confirmed the efficacy but suggested variability in the injection-site reactions. . Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed a statistically significant difference in the incidence of LRTI and RSV-ARI between the vaccine and placebo groups in older adults. However, no significant differences were observed in overall AEs or serious AEs.
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.