↓ Skip to main content

Rationale and methods of a randomized controlled trial of immunogenicity, safety and impact on carriage of pneumococcal conjugate and polysaccharide vaccines in infants in Papua New Guinea

Overview of attention for article published in Pneumonia, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#43 of 115)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Rationale and methods of a randomized controlled trial of immunogenicity, safety and impact on carriage of pneumococcal conjugate and polysaccharide vaccines in infants in Papua New Guinea
Published in
Pneumonia, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s41479-017-0044-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah Lehmann, Wendy Kirarock, Anita H. J. van den Biggelaar, Megan Passey, Peter Jacoby, Gerard Saleu, Geraldine Masiria, Birunu Nivio, Andrew Greenhill, Tilda Orami, Jacinta Francis, Rebecca Ford, Lea-Ann Kirkham, Vela Solomon, Peter C. Richmond, William S. Pomat, for the 10v13v PCV trial team

Abstract

Children in third-world settings including Papua New Guinea (PNG) experience early onset of carriage with a broad range of pneumococcal serotypes, resulting in a high incidence of severe pneumococcal disease and deaths in the first 2 years of life. Vaccination trials in high endemicity settings are needed to provide evidence and guidance on optimal strategies to protect children in these settings against pneumococcal infections. This report describes the rationale, objectives, methods, study population, follow-up and specimen collection for a vaccination trial conducted in an endemic and logistically challenging setting in PNG. The trial aimed to determine whether currently available pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) are suitable for use under PNG's accelerated immunization schedule, and that a schedule including pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV) in later infancy is safe and immunogenic in this high-risk population. This open randomized-controlled trial was conducted between November 2011 and March 2016, enrolling 262 children aged 1 month between November 2011 and April 2014. The participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive 10-valent PCV (10vPCV) or 13-valent PCV (13vPCV) in a 1-2-3-month schedule, with further randomization to receive PPV or no PPV at age 9 months, followed by a 1/5th PPV challenge at age 23 months. A total of 1229 blood samples were collected to measure humoral and cellular immune responses and 1238 nasopharyngeal swabs to assess upper respiratory tract colonization and carriage load. Serious adverse events were monitored throughout the study. Of the 262 children enrolled, 87% received 3 doses of PCV, 79% were randomized to receive PPV or no PPV at age 9 months, and 67% completed the study at 24 months of age with appropriate immunization and challenge. Laboratory testing of the many samples collected during this trial will determine the impact of the different vaccine schedules and formulations on nasopharyngeal carriage, antibody production and function, and immune memory. The final data will inform policy on pneumococcal vaccine schedules in countries with children at high risk of pneumococcal disease by providing direct comparison of an accelerated schedule of 10vPCV and 13vPCV and the potential advantages of PPV following PCV immunization. ClinicalTrials.gov CTN NCT01619462, retrospectively registered on May 28, 2012.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 21%
Student > Master 6 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Researcher 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 14 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,438,372
of 23,590,588 outputs
Outputs from Pneumonia
#43
of 115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,128
of 444,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pneumonia
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,590,588 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 115 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 444,151 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.