Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Cjepiva za sprječavanje herpesa zostera u starijih osoba

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008858.pub5Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 02 octubre 2023see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Infecciones respiratorias agudas

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2023 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Juliana de Oliveira Gomes

    Correspondencia a: Department of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

    [email protected]

  • Anna MZ Gagliardi

    Department of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

  • Brenda NG Andriolo

    Cochrane Brazil, Centro de Estudos de Saúde Baseada em Evidências e Avaliação Tecnológica em Saúde, São Paulo, Brazil

  • Maria Regina Torloni

    Cochrane Brazil, Centro de Estudos de Saúde Baseada em Evidências e Avaliação Tecnológica em Saúde, São Paulo, Brazil

  • Regis B Andriolo

    Department of Public Health, Universidade do Estado do Pará, Belém, Brazil

  • Maria Eduarda dos Santos Puga

    Cochrane Brazil, Centro de Estudos de Saúde Baseada em Evidências e Avaliação Tecnológica em Saúde, São Paulo, Brazil

  • Eduardo Canteiro Cruz

    Department of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

Contributions of authors

Conceived the idea for the review: Anna Gagliardi (AG), Maria Regina Torloni (MT) and Brenda Nazaré Gomes Andriolo (BNGA)
Co‐ordinating the review: Juliana de Oliveira Gomes (JOG)
Screening search results: AG, MT, BNGA, Regis Bruni Andriolo (RBA), Maria Eduarda Puga (MEP)
Organising retrieval of papers: AG, JOG, Eduardo Canteiro Cruz (ECC), MEP
Screening retrieved papers against inclusion criteria: AG, MT, JOC, ECC
Appraising quality of papers: AG, BNGA, JOG, MT
Extracting data from papers: AG, JOG
Writing to authors of papers for additional information: AG, JOG, MT
Providing additional data about papers: AG, JOG, ECC
Obtaining and screening data on unpublished studies: AG, JOG, MT
Data management for the review: AG, BNGA, MT, JOG, RBA, ECC
Entering data into Review Manager 5: AG, JOG, MT
Review Manager 5 statistical data: JOC, BNGA, RBA
Other statistical analysis not using Review Manager 5: MT, RBA
Interpretation of data: AG, BNGA, JOG, MT
Statistical inferences: AG, BNGA, MT
Writing the review: AG, BNGA, ECC, JOG, MT, RBA,
Guarantor for the review: JOG
Responsible for reading and checking the review before submission: AG, BNGA, ECC, JOG, MT, RBA

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • Brazilian Cochrane Centre, Brazil

    Non‐financial support

External sources

  • No sources of support provided

Declarations of interest

Anna MZ Gagliardi has declared that they have no conflict of interest.
Brenda NG Andriolo has declared that they have no conflict of interest.
Maria R Torloni has declared that they have no conflict of interest.
Juliana O Gomes has declared that they have no conflict of interest.
Regis B Andriolo has declared that they have no conflict of interest.
Eduardo C Cruz has declared that they have no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgements

The Methods section of this protocol is based on a standard template developed by Cochrane Airways and adapted by Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections.

We thank Bernardo GO Soares for past contributions as the review author.

The following people conducted the editorial process for this review update:

  • Sign‐off Editors (final editorial decision): Mark Jones (Bond University, Australia); Mieke van Driel (The University of Queensland, Australia).

  • Managing Editor (provided editorial guidance to authors, edited the review, selected peer reviewers and collated peer reviewer comments): Liz Dooley (Bond University, Australia).

  • Contact Editor (provided valuable comments during the process of updating this review, and recommended an editorial decision): Susan Smith (Professor of General Practice, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland).

  • Statistical Editor (provided comments): Robert Ware, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University.

  • Copy Editor (copy editing and production): Jenny Bellorini, Cochrane Central Production Service.

Peer reviewers provided comments and recommended an editorial decision:

  • Clinical/content review: requested to remain anonymous.

  • Consumer review: Jonathan M. Fuchs, FACHE, Kidder Street Consulting Group.

  • Methods review: Leslie Choi, Evidence Synthesis Development Editor, Cochrane Central Executive Team.

  • Search review: Justin Clark (Bond University, Australia).

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2023 Oct 02

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

Review

Juliana Oliveira Gomes, Anna MZ Gagliardi, Brenda NG Andriolo, Maria Regina Torloni, Regis B Andriolo, Maria Eduarda dos Santos Puga, Eduardo Canteiro Cruz

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008858.pub5

2019 Nov 07

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

Review

Anna MZ Gagliardi, Brenda NG Andriolo, Maria Regina Torloni, Bernardo GO Soares, Juliana de Oliveira Gomes, Regis B Andriolo, Eduardo Canteiro Cruz

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008858.pub4

2016 Mar 03

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

Review

Anna MZ Gagliardi, Brenda NG Andriolo, Maria Regina Torloni, Bernardo GO Soares

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008858.pub3

2012 Oct 17

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

Review

Anna MZ Gagliardi, Brenda Nazaré Gomes Silva, Maria R Torloni, Bernardo GO Soares

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008858.pub2

2010 Dec 08

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

Protocol

Anna MZ Gagliardi, Brenda Nazaré Gomes Silva, Maria R Torloni, Bernardo Soares

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008858

Differences between protocol and review

We eliminated the secondary outcome 'mean duration of vaccine protection'. We added 'dropouts' as a secondary outcome because this relates to the safety of the intervention.

We considered blinding of outcome assessment to be at low risk of bias when participants in double‐blind trials filled out cards received from the investigator themselves.

We considered the adverse event 'death' separately from serious adverse events as a secondary outcome for the review. We based this decision on the importance of death as a concept in both studies and clinical practice.

In Methods > Data collection and analysis > Measures of treatment effect > Continuous data, we added: "we inserted these data into an additional table".

In Methods > Unit of analysis issues, we used data from cross‐over studies (separated or grouped) when available.

In Methods > Sensitivity analysis, we added cross‐over studies.

In Data collection and analysis > Data synthesis, we changed the text to: "we conducted meta‐analyses using a random‐effects model".

Brenda NG Andriolo was previously known as Brenda NG Silva.

The first author Anna Maria Zaragoza Gagliardi 2019 (Gagliardi 2019) was changed to Juliana de Oliveira Gomes in 2022.

In this update (2022), the 'incidence of herpes zoster' was changed to 'cumulative incidence of herpes zoster' since the primary studies defined the incidence of outcome over a period of time.

The outcomes 'Interference of herpes zoster in activities' and 'ZBPI pain score during the first 14 days after HZ onset', which reflect how much herpes zoster pain limits people from performing their daily tasks, were removed from the analyses, since they were not pre‐specified in the protocol.

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.