The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Pneumococcal Disease after Pneumococcal Vaccination: An Alternative Method to Estimate the Efficacy of Pneumococcal Vaccine
Abstract
Trials of pneumococcal vaccine in healthy young adult populations suggest 75 to 95 per cent type-specific efficacy. Trials have not been done, however, in groups for which pneumococcal vaccine is currently recommended in the United States. To assess efficacy in the immunocompromised groups now receiving the vaccine, we compared serotypes of 35 isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae isolated from blood or cerebrospinal fluid one month or longer after the patient had received commercially available pneumococcal vaccine with serotypes of 392 isolates from unvaccinated persons surveyed in a study of the nationwide distribution of pneumococcal serotypes. Proportions of infections with vaccine serotypes were unexpectedly similar. An alternative approach to estimation of vaccine efficacy suggested an average efficacy of 36 per cent in persons of all ages. The estimated efficacy was lowest in children two to 10 years old (less than or equal to 0 per cent) and in persons with preexisting diseases that are thought to predispose to pneumococcal disease (less than or equal to 0 per cent), and highest in the group over 10 years old (60 per cent). The possibility that efficacy is low in high-risk, immunocompromised populations makes it important to evaluate clinical efficacy and not just serum antibody responses in such groups.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Hao (2015) · doi:10.1002/14651858 · Cited by 11,321
Prophylaxis with Oral Penicillin in Children with Sickle Cell Anemia
Gaston, M. H., Verter, J. I., Woods, G., Pegelow, C., Kelleher, J., Presbury, G., Zarkowsky, H., Vichinsky, E., Iyer, R., Lobel, J. S., et al. (1986) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198606193142501 · Cited by 1,162
The Protective Efficacy of Polyvalent Pneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine
Shapiro, E. D., Berg, A. T., Austrian, R., Schroeder, D., Parcells, V., Margolis, A., Adair, R. K., & Clemens, J. D. (1991) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199111213252101 · Cited by 1,051
Andrews, N. J., Waight, P. A., Burbidge, P., Pearce, E., Roalfe, L., Zancolli, M., Slack, M., Ladhani, S. N., Miller, E., & Goldblatt, D. (2014) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(14)70822-9 · Cited by 545
The test-negative design for estimating influenza vaccine effectiveness
Jackson, M. L., & Nelson, J. C. (2013) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.02.053 · Cited by 510
Metadata
- Authors
- Broome, C. V., Facklam, R. R., & Fraser, D. W.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1980-09-04
- Volume
- 303
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 549-552
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2316172905
- Cited by
- 338
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 22.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pneumococcal Disease after Pneumococcal Vaccination: An Alternative Method to Estimate the Efficacy of Pneumococcal Vaccine. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm198009043031003
- The paper
- Broome, C. V., Facklam, R. R., & Fraser, D. W. (1980). Pneumococcal Disease after Pneumococcal Vaccination: An Alternative Method to Estimate the Efficacy of Pneumococcal Vaccine. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm198009043031003
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.