Volume 13, Number 1—January 2007
Research
Vaccine Effectiveness Estimates, 2004–2005 Mumps Outbreak, England
Cheryl Cohen*1
, Joanne M. White†, Emma J. Savage†, Judith R. Glynn*, Yoon Choi†, Nick Andrews†, David Brown†, and Mary E. Ramsay†
, Joanne M. White†, Emma J. Savage†, Judith R. Glynn*, Yoon Choi†, Nick Andrews†, David Brown†, and Mary E. Ramsay†
Table 4
Estimates of vaccine effectiveness assuming that the proportion of the population vaccinated (PPV) was 1%, 2%, or 5% higher than reported
| Coverage | Effectiveness | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 dose, % (95% CI*) | 2 doses, % (95% CI) | |
| Baseline | 87.8 (83.1–91.1) | 94.6 (93.0–95.9) |
| PPV + 1% | 88.4 (84.0–91.6) | 97.5 (96.6–98.2) |
| PPV + 2% | 89.0 (84.8–92.1) | 98.0 (97.2–98.6) |
| PPV + 5% | 90.8 (87.3–93.4) | 99.3 (99.0–99.5) |
*CI, confidence interval.
1Current affiliations: National Institute for Communicable Diseases, Johannesburg, South Africa, and University of the Witwatersrand School of Public Health, Parktown, South Africa
Page created: January 22, 2013
Page updated: January 22, 2013
Page reviewed: January 22, 2013
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
Content Credential