The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Protective Effect of BCG against Tuberculous Meningitis and Miliary Tuberculosis: A Meta-Analysis
Abstract
The protective effect of BCG against tuberculosis (TB) estimated in randomized controlled trials and observational studies ranges from negative to close to a 100%. One of the many explanations offered for this is that different immunological mechanisms may be associated with protective effect against different forms and sites of disease. In this investigation, we recalculated vaccine protective effect separately for pulmonary disease and for meningeal/miliary disease in randomized controlled trials and case-control studies, tested for heterogeneity in site-specific estimates of protective effect and calculated a summary measure when appropriate. We found protective effect against pulmonary disease to be heterogeneous to a statistically significant degree, and thus we did not calculate a summary measure of protection. Protective effect against meningeal and miliary TB was higher than against pulmonary disease and, except for a single study with two cases only, appeared to be homogenous. Summary BCG protective effect against miliary or meningeal TB in randomized controlled trials was 86% (95% confidence interval [CI] 65, 95) and in case-control studies 75% (95% CI: 61, 84). The fact that protective effect appeared to be homogeneous against meningitis and miliary TB but not against pulmonary disease may result from the fact that patients with meningitis are on average younger and thus less likely to have been exposed to atypical bacteria; to a waning of the protective effect of BCG; or from the diversity of mechanisms of pathogenesis of pulmonary disease, which can originate from reinfection, reactivation or primary progression.
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
Variation in protection by BCG: implications of and for heterologous immunity
Fine, P. E. M. (1995) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(95)92348-9 · Cited by 1,380
Trunz, B. B., Fine, P., & Dye, C. (2006) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(06)68507-3 · Cited by 1,114
Protection by BCG vaccine against tuberculosis: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
Mangtani, P., Abubakar, I., Ariti, C., Beynon, R., Pimpin, L., Fine, P. E. M., Rodrigues, L. C., Smith, P. G., Lipman, M., Whiting, P. F., et al. (2014) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/cit790 · Cited by 995
Self-citationEpidemiology of Extrapulmonary Tuberculosis in the United States, 1993–2006
Peto, H. M., Pratt, R. H., Harrington, T. A., LoBue, P. A., & Armstrong, L. R. (2009) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/605559 · Cited by 741
Newton, S. M., Brent, A. J., Anderson, S., Whittaker, E., & Kampmann, B. (2008) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(08)70182-8 · Cited by 480
Metadata
- Authors
- RODRIGUES, L. C., DIWAN, V. K., & WHEELER, J. G.
- Venue
- International Journal of Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1993
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1154-1158
- ISSN
- 0300-5771 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3685
- OpenAlex
- W2123643891
- Cited by
- 650
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.56
- 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: Protective Effect of BCG against Tuberculous Meningitis and Miliary Tuberculosis: A Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ije/22.6.1154
- The paper
- RODRIGUES, L. C., DIWAN, V. K., & WHEELER, J. G. (1993). Protective Effect of BCG against Tuberculous Meningitis and Miliary Tuberculosis: A Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/22.6.1154
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.