MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1007/bf01360321

Медицинская библиотека · Sozial- und Praventivmedizin · 1995

[A look back at 2 mumps outbreaks].

Paccaud M F, Hazeghi P, Bourquin M, Maurer A M, Steiner C A, Seiler A J, Helbling P, Zimmermann H

Аннотация на английскомСтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

Two studies are presented. The first one concerns a mumps outbreak in a kindergarten in Geneva in June 1991. Of 26 children, nine (34.6%) got mumps. Of nine children vaccinated with the Rubini vaccine strain, seven had the disease as opposed to only one of 14 children vaccinated with the Urabe strain. The vaccine efficacy of the Rubini strain was estimated at 22% with a 95% confidence interval of -10% to 45%. The second study concerns a cluster of 112 mumps patients seen by a pediatrician in the Bernese Jura region between September 1992 and May 1993. A case-control study was carried out resulting in a vaccine efficacy estimate of 50% with a 95% confidence interval of -19% to 81%. Of the cases, 51 (45.5%) had been vaccinated against mumps, 50 of them (98%) with the Rubini vaccine strain. Of the controls, 30 (61.2%) had been vaccinated, 86.7% of them with Rubini. Methodological problems of case selection and their possible effects on the estimated vaccine efficacy are discussed. The results of these two studies have been confirmed by more recent investigations. In retrospect, we therefore conclude that small studies can serve as early indicators for epidemiological evidence and that they can be finally integrated into a more complete picture.

Для цитирования: Paccaud M F, Hazeghi P, Bourquin M, Maurer A M, Steiner C A, Seiler A J, Helbling P, Zimmermann H. [A look back at 2 mumps outbreaks].. Sozial- und Praventivmedizin. 1995. DOI: 10.1007/bf01360321.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.