ReviewEClinicalMedicine2026
Hepatitis A vaccination and its public-health impact in routine prevention and outbreak control: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in EClinicalMedicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hepatitis A vaccination is used for routine prevention and outbreak control, but its effectiveness and population-level impact have not been comprehensively synthesised. We aimed to assess vaccine effectiveness, certainty of evidence, and population-level impact. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Biological Abstracts, and CENTRAL for studies published from 1st January 1985 to 1st April 2026. Randomised controlled trials and observational studies with an unvaccinated comparison group were eligible if they assessed pre-exposure or post-exposure hepatitis A vaccination and reported effect estimates or sufficient data for their calculation. Estimates were pooled using a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2 and ROBINS-I, and certainty of evidence with GRADE. Ecological studies evaluating vaccine impact before and after implementation of paediatric vaccination programmes were analysed separately. The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420261308908). Findings: We included 21 publications in the meta-analysis and 19 studies in the population-level impact analysis. Pooled effectiveness of pre-exposure vaccination was 95·8% (95% CI 93·1-97·4; I Interpretation: Hepatitis A vaccination provides very high protection in pre-exposure settings. Post-exposure vaccination may also be effective, but confidence in this estimate is limited by very low-certainty evidence and substantial heterogeneity. Population-level findings support the public health value of routine immunisation and suggest potential benefit in outbreak response. Funding: Cooperatio 31 fund, Health Sciences, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
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.