Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 836

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Rotavirus Infection in Infants as Protection against Subsequent Infections

Open access
Velázquez, F. Raúl, Matson, David O., Calva, Juan J., Guerrero, M. Lourdes, Morrow, Ardythe L., Carter-Campbell, Shelly, Glass, Roger I., Estes, Mary K., Pickering, Larry K., Ruiz-Palacios, Guillermo M.·1996·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Rotavirus is the leading cause of severe diarrhea in infants. To provide a base line for assessing the efficacy of rotavirus vaccines, we evaluated the protection that is conferred by natural rotavirus infection. METHODS: We monitored 200 Mexican infants from birth to two years of age by weekly home visits and stool collections. A physician assessed the severity of any episodes of diarrhea and collected additional stool specimens for testing by enzyme immunoassay and typing of strains. Serum collected during the first week of life and every four months thereafter was tested for antirotavirus IgA and IgG. RESULTS: A total of 316 rotavirus infections were detected on the basis of the fecal excretion of virus (56 percent) or a serologic response (77 percent), of which 52 percent were first and 48 percent repeated infections. Children with one, two, or three previous infections had progressively lower risks of both subsequent rotavirus infection (adjusted relative risk, 0.62, 0.40, and 0.34, respectively) and diarrhea (adjusted relative risk, 0.23, 0.17, and 0.08) than children who had no previous infections. No child had moderate-to-severe diarrhea after two infections, whether symptomatic or asymptomatic. Subsequent infections were significantly less severe than first infections (P=0.024), and second infections were more likely to be caused by another G type (P=0.054). CONCLUSION: In infants, natural rotavirus infection confers protection against subsequent infection. This protection increases with each new infection and reduces the severity of the diarrhea.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199610033351404

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 18 references

Cited by

See all 836

Metadata

Authors
Velázquez, F. R., Matson, D. O., Calva, J. J., Guerrero, M. L., Morrow, A. L., Carter-Campbell, S., Glass, R. I., Estes, M. K., Pickering, L. K., & Ruiz-Palacios, G. M.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1996-10-03
Volume
335
Issue
14
Pages
1022-1028
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2336472430
Cited by
836
References
18
FWCI
14.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Rotavirus Infection in Infants as Protection against Subsequent Infections. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199610033351404
The paper
Velázquez, F. R., Matson, D. O., Calva, J. J., Guerrero, M. L., Morrow, A. L., Carter-Campbell, S., Glass, R. I., Estes, M. K., Pickering, L. K., & Ruiz-Palacios, G. M. (1996). Rotavirus Infection in Infants as Protection against Subsequent Infections. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199610033351404

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.