ArticlePLOS global public health2026
Effectiveness and impact of the 2-component acellular pertussis vaccine as a preschool booster in Finland - A register-based study.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2005, Finland replaced the whole-cell pertussis (wP) 3 + 1 schedule with an acellular pertussis (aP) 2 + 1 infant schedule supplemented by a DTaP-IPV preschool booster at age 4 in the National Immunization Program (NIP). Recent pertussis resurgence and uncertainty about the duration of vaccine-induced protection have raised concerns. We assessed the effectiveness, duration of protection and population-level impact of the preschool booster. We conducted a nationwide population-based register study in Finland (1995-2019). Vaccine effectiveness (VE) of a two-component (2aP) preschool booster against laboratory-confirmed pertussis was estimated by comparing children with and without the booster, followed from age of 4.25 years during 2011-2019 using a covariate-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model. Population-level impact was assessed by comparing pertussis incidence before (1995-2002; wP primary series without preschool booster) and after (2012-2019; aP primary series with the booster) its introduction. The primary cohort included 466 240 children (94% vaccination coverage). Among 225 cases, 88% were diagnosed serologically and 12% by culture or PCR. VE against any laboratory-confirmed pertussis during 5-year follow-up was 51% (95% CI, 27-67), with VE of 86% (95% CI, 67-94) against PCR/culture-confirmed and 37% (95% CI, -1-60) against serology-confirmed cases. VE remained stable up to 8 years post-vaccination without clear waning. Following booster introduction in the NIP, pertussis incidence decreased by 65% (95% CI, 60-69) among children ≥4.25 years and by 39% (95% CI, 30-48) among those ≤3.75 years, indicating both direct and indirect effects. The 2aP preschool booster seems to provide moderate and sustained protection against pertussis compared to children without the booster. Effectiveness was notably higher against PCR/culture-confirmed cases throughout the follow-up, likely due to lower specificity of serology and differences in diagnostic practices by disease manifestations. These findings support continued use of the preschool booster in Finland.
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.