Unknown

Dataset Information

0

A Meta-Analysis of Serological Response Associated with Yellow Fever Vaccination.


ABSTRACT: Despite previous evidence of high level of efficacy, no synthetic metric of yellow fever (YF) vaccine efficacy is currently available. Based on the studies identified in a recent systematic review, we conducted a random-effects meta-analysis of the serological response associated with YF vaccination. Eleven studies conducted between 1965 and 2011 representing 4,868 individual observations were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled estimate of serological response was 97.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 82.9-99.7%). There was evidence of between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 89.1%), but this heterogeneity did not appear to be related to study size, study design, or seroconversion measurement or definition. Pooled estimates were significantly higher (P < 0.0001) among studies conducted in nonendemic settings (98.9%, 95% CI = 98.2-99.4%) than among those conducted in endemic settings (94.2%, 95% CI = 83.8-98.1%). These results provide background information against which to evaluate the efficacy of fractional doses of YF vaccine that may be used in outbreak situations.

SUBMITTER: Jean K 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5154464 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

A Meta-Analysis of Serological Response Associated with Yellow Fever Vaccination.

Jean Kévin K   Donnelly Christl A CA   Ferguson Neil M NM   Garske Tini T  

The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene 20161010 6


Despite previous evidence of high level of efficacy, no synthetic metric of yellow fever (YF) vaccine efficacy is currently available. Based on the studies identified in a recent systematic review, we conducted a random-effects meta-analysis of the serological response associated with YF vaccination. Eleven studies conducted between 1965 and 2011 representing 4,868 individual observations were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled estimate of serological response was 97.5% (95% confidence in  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC7578390 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7349955 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4011853 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6963942 | biostudies-literature
2019-01-31 | GSE125921 | GEO
| S-EPMC5566484 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4978951 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC9250104 | biostudies-literature
2020-05-19 | GSE136163 | GEO
| S-EPMC4792480 | biostudies-literature