Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ PLoS ONEarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
PLoS ONE
Article . 2025 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
PLoS ONE
Article . 2025
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
PubMed Central
Article . 2025
License: CC BY
Data sources: PubMed Central
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
PLoS ONE
Article . 2025
Data sources: DOAJ
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
versions View all 5 versions
addClaim

Measles vaccines and non-specific effects on mortality or morbidity: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors: Louise A. Fournais; Anne C. Zimakoff; Andreas Jensen; Jeppe H. Svanholm; Ingvild Fosse; Lone G. Stensballe;

Measles vaccines and non-specific effects on mortality or morbidity: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background This review evaluates the hypothesis of beneficial non-specific effects of the standard-titre measles vaccine. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Trials included standard or high-titre live attenuated measles containing vaccines compared to other vaccines or placebo. The primary outcomes were mortality and morbidity. Secondary outcomes were infections, antibiotic use, atopy, allergies, asthma, and atopic dermatitis. Findings 23 articles were included in this systematic review. Mortality: Two doses of measles vaccine vs. only one dose showed no significant effect on mortality; risk ratio (RR) = 1.05 (95% CI: 0.78 to 1.41), p = 0.76. The analysis was based on a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 25% and a control group event rate of 2.32% as measured in the actual trials included in the analysis. In males, the association was rejected: RR = 1.09 (0.86 to 1.37), p = 0.47. In females, the association was not rejected at 25%,but was at 33% level: RR = 1.0 (0.64 to 1.54), p = 0.99. Morbidity: Overall, the hypothesis was rejected: RR = 0.94 (0.80 to 1.10), p = 0.43. The rejection was sustained for both sexes: females RR = 0.95 (0.77 to 1.18), p = 0.6; males RR = 0.92 (0.83 to 1.03), p = 0.13. Interpretation Based on evidence from randomised controlled trials, this systematic literature review and meta-analysis did not support the hypothesis of non-specific effects of standard-titre measles containing vaccines. Trial Sequential Analysis indicated that the meta-analysis included sufficient data to reach this conclusion. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42022344473

Country
Denmark
Keywords

Diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis, Male, Science, Vaccination, Q, Measles Vaccine, R, Child-mortality, Trial, Long-term survival, Age, Guinea-bissau, Medicine, Humans, Female, Morbidity, Titer, Research Article, Measles, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    5
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
5
Top 10%
Average
Top 10%
Green
gold