ArticlePNAS nexus2024
Influenza vaccine allocation in tropical settings under constrained resources.
Article in PNAS nexus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating a deterministic canonical model for tropical influenza.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Fighting the flu in the tropics: The role of influenza vaccination in Southeast Asia.Asia Pacific allergy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Influenza virus seasonality, synchronicity, and vaccine supply differ substantially between temperate and tropical settings, and optimal vaccination strategy may differ on this basis. Many national vaccine recommendations focus on high-risk groups, elderly populations, and healthcare workers despite previous analyses demonstrating broad benefits to vaccinating younger high-contact age groups. In this study, we parameterized an age-structured nonseasonal asynchronous epidemiological model of influenza virus transmission for a tropical low-income setting. We evaluated timing and age allocation of vaccines across vaccine supplies ranging from 10 to 90% using decade-based age groups. Year-round vaccination was beneficial when compared with more concentrated annual vaccine distribution. When targeting a single age group for vaccine prioritization, maximum vaccine allocation to the 10-19 high-contact age group minimized annual influenza mortality for all but one vaccine supply. When evaluating across all possible age allocations, optimal strategies always allocated a plurality of vaccines to school-age children (10-19). The converse, however, was not true as not all strategies allocating a plurality to children aged 10-19 minimized mortality. Allocating a high proportion of vaccine supply to the 10-19 age group is necessary but not sufficient to minimize annual mortality as distribution of remaining vaccine doses to other age groups also needs to be optimized. Strategies focusing on indirect benefits (vaccinating children) showed higher variance in mortality outcomes than strategies focusing on direct benefits (vaccinating the elderly). However, the indirect benefit approaches showed a lower mean mortality and a lower minimum mortality than vaccination focused on the elderly.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.