Cited by 114Asthma and respiratory diseasesFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchImmune responses and vaccinations

Vaccination and allergic disease: a birth cohort study

Open access
McKeever, Tricia M., Lewis, Sarah A., Smith, Chris, Hubbard, Richard·2004·American Journal of Public Health

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We examined the effect of vaccination for diphtheria; polio; pertussis and tetanus; or measles, mumps, and rubella on the incidence of physician-diagnosed asthma and eczema. METHODS: We used a previously established birth cohort in the West Midlands General Practice research database. RESULTS: We found an association between vaccination and the development of allergic disease; however, this association was present only among children with the fewest physician visits and can be explained by this factor. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that currently recommended routine vaccinations are not a risk factor for asthma or eczema.

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 · 10.2105/ajph.94.6.985

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In McKeever 2004, there was a significant association between MMR immunisation and asthma only for the group with lower GP consultation during the first 6 live months (hazard ratio 7.18; 95% CI 2.95 to 17.49).

    “Significant association only for the group with lower GP consultation during the first 6 live months (hazard ratio 7.18; 95% CI from 2. 95 to 17. 49)”

    From Vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella in children (2012) · cites this paper as McKeever 2004

    Table 2 (Results; page not provided) reports an MMR–asthma hazard ratio of 7.18 (95% CI 2.95–17.49) for the lowest GP-consultation group; the other consultation strata have confidence intervals spanning 1. However, the MMR groups are based on consultations in the first 18 months, not the first 6 months. The six-month measure applies to DPPT. (LLM, conf=0.93)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Stratifying for GP consultation frequency in the first 18 months, HR estimates remain significant only for the subgroup with lower consulting frequency (zero to six times) and not for the other subgroups: HR 7.18 (95% CI 2.95 to 17.49) for asthma; HR 10.4 (95% CI 4.61 to 23.29) for eczema.

    “Stratifying for GP consultation frequency in the first 18 months, HR estimates remain significant only for the subgroup with lower consulting frequency (zero to six times in the first 18 months) and not for the other subgroups (seven to 10 times, 11 to 16 times and more than 16 times): HR 7.18 (95% CI 2.95 to 17.49) for association between MMR vaccination and asthma; HR 10.4 (95% CI 4.61 to 23.29)”

    From Vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella in children (2012) · cites this paper as McKeever 2004

  • Estimates from McKeever 2004 (although significant) are strongly affected by ascertainment bias, as children who are not taken to the doctor are less likely to be vaccinated and also have fewer opportunities to have diagnoses of allergic diseases recorded.

    “Estimates from McKeever 2004 (although significant) are strongly affected by ascertainment bias, as children who are not taken to the doctor are less likely to be vaccinated and also have fewer opportunities to have diagnoses of allergic diseases recorded.”

    From Vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella in children (2012) · cites this paper as McKeever 2004

  • The cohort study by McKeever 2004 found crude hazard ratios of 3.51 (95% CI 2.42 to 5.11) for asthma and 4.61 (95% CI 3.15 to 6.74) for eczema.

    “Correspondent crude hazard ratios (HR) were 3.51 (95% CI 2.42 to 5.11) and 4.61 (95% CI 3.15 to 6.74) for asthma and eczema, respectively.”

    From Vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella in children (2012) · cites this paper as McKeever 2004

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McKeever, T. M., Lewis, S. A., Smith, C., & Hubbard, R.
Affiliations
University of Nottingham (GB)
Venue
American Journal of Public Health
Published
2004-06
Volume
94
Issue
6
Pages
985-989
ISSN
  • 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0048
OpenAlex
W1982817031
Cited by
114
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
FWCI
4.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immune responses and vaccinations
Keywords
vaccination, allergic diseases, asthma, atopic dermatitis, diphtheria, poliomyelitis, pertussis, tetanus, measles, mumps and rubella, routine childhood immunization, physician visits, birth cohort
MeSH terms
Asthma, Child, Child, Preschool, Eczema, England, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Male, Physicians, Family, Vaccination, Cohort Studies

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