ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2026
Real-world evidence on RSV vaccine uptake, effectiveness, and safety in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Respiratory syncytial virus disease burden in adults aged ≥50 years old: A retrospective national surveillance database analysis in Mexico (2015-2023).Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Disproportionality Analysis and Timing of Drug-Associated Guillain-Barré Syndrome Onset Based on the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report Database.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Vaccines to prevent respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)-associated lower respiratory tract disease in older adults have become available in recent years. We investigated RSV vaccine uptake, effectiveness, and safety signals in older adults reported in post-licensure real-world studies. Methods: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we conducted 11 monthly searches (between November 5, 2024, and November 10, 2025) in Ovid Medline, Embase, and Global Health databases. Meta-analyses, using random-effects modelling, were performed for uptake, effectiveness, and safety signals. PROSPERO registration: CRD42025643585. Findings: A total of 3900 studies were identified, of which 36 were included, published between December 22, 2023, and October 28, 2025, and covering over 121.8 million individuals across the United States, United Kingdom, Italy, Australia, Czech Republic, Switzerland, France, Canada, and Israel. In the United States, RSV vaccine uptake among adults aged ≥60 years during the 2023/24 RSV season was 18.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 12.2-25.7; ten studies), varying by clinical and socio-demographic subgroups. Among adults aged ≥60 years, pooled estimates of vaccine effectiveness were 75.3% (95% CI: 73.7-76.9; three studies) against any laboratory-confirmed RSV-positive infection, 76.4% (95% CI: 74.2-78.5; four studies) against RSV-related emergency department or urgent care visits, 74.8% (95% CI: 66.8-82.9; six studies) against RSV-related hospital admissions, and 79.8% (95% CI: 68.1-91.5; four studies) against severe RSV-associated disease. Following vaccination, Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) was reported in two studies with between 5.2 and 6.5 cases per one million doses for RSVPreF3+AS01 ( Interpretation: RSV vaccine uptake in older adults was low globally with substantial disparities between sociodemographic and clinical subgroups. Our study showed a favourable safety profile and high effectiveness of the RSV vaccines, highlighting the value of wide implementation of these vaccines. Funding: There was no funding for the study.
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.