Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33893231›Full record

SynthesisThorax2021

Timing of

James M Trauer, Andrew Kawai, Anna K Coussens, Manjula Datta, Bridget M Williams, Emma S McBryde, Romain Ragonnet

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Thorax, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Caffeine-mediated CD39Frontiers in immunology · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

James M TrauerSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia james.trauer@monash.edu.
Andrew KawaiSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Anna K CoussensInfectious Diseases and Immune Defence Division, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Manjula DattaASPIRE, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Bridget M WilliamsSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Emma S McBrydeAustralian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Romain RagonnetSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Monash University · AUAustralian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine · AUWalter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleThe heterogeneity in efficacy observed in studies of BCG vaccination is not fully explained by currently accepted hypotheses, such as latitudinal gradient in non-tuberculous mycobacteria exposure.

methodsWe updated previous systematic reviews of the effectiveness of BCG vaccination to 31 December 2020. We employed an identical search strategy and inclusion/exclusion criteria to these earlier reviews, but reclassified several studies, developed an alternative classification system and considered study demography, diagnostic approach and tuberculosis (TB)-related epidemiological context. MAIN

resultsOf 21 included trials, those recruiting neonates and children aged under 5 were consistent in demonstrating considerable protection against TB for several years. Trials in high-burden settings with shorter follow-up also showed considerable protection, as did most trials in settings of declining burden with longer follow-up. However, the few trials performed in high-burden settings with longer follow-up showed no protection, sometimes with higher case rates in the vaccinated than the controls in the later follow-up period.

conclusionsThe most plausible explanatory hypothesis for these results is that BCG protects against TB that results from exposure shortly after vaccination. However, we found no evidence of protection when exposure occurs later from vaccination, which would be of greater importance in trials in high-burden settings with longer follow-up. In settings of declining burden, most exposure occurs shortly following vaccination and the sustained protection observed for many years thereafter represents continued protection against this early exposure. By contrast, in settings of continued intense transmission, initial protection subsequently declines with repeated exposure to

Indexed as

Mycobacterium tuberculosisTuberculosisBCG VaccineChildHumansInfant, NewbornVaccinationBCG Vaccineclinical epidemiologyrespiratory infectiontuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID33893231
PMCPMC8526882
OpenAlexW3153605753

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.