01-022 · EVIDENCE A · SOURCE-SENSITIVE

Pneumococcal vaccine for people over 65

65 岁以上打肺炎球菌疫苗

Source cost

Several hundred yuan. In some regions, it is provided free of charge for seniors.

Source return

In a trial involving 84,500 seniors, the 13-valent pneumococcal vaccine cut cases of pneumonia caused by strains it targets by roughly 46%, and reduced instances of the most severe invasive infections by 75%. However, it showed no effect on pneumonia cases caused by any other pathogens, so it won’t prevent all types of pneumonia. The absolute confidence interval width is 95.2%.

Evidence grade

A

THE LOW-ROI DETOURSatire, not advice

Move “Pneumococcal vaccine for people over 65” to Future Me's calendar

The excuse

If I do not open the notes, no new task has technically appeared.

What feels good now

Today I keep a little money, a few minutes and avoid interrupting my default routine.

What the source says

The source summarizes the return this way: “In a trial involving 84,500 seniors, the 13-valent pneumococcal vaccine cut cases of pneumonia caused by strains it targets by roughly 46%, and reduced instances of the most severe invasive infections by 75%. However, it showed no effect on pneumonia cases caused by any other pathogens, so it won’t prevent all types of pneumonia. The absolute confidence interval width is 95.2%.” Evidence grade A. The original states the population, caveats, and sources; this is not a personal forecast.

THE ENGLISH EDITION

Original recommendation and evidence

Source commit a994b6a0c905

22. Pneumococcal vaccine for people over 65

Cost: Several hundred yuan. In some regions, it is provided free of charge for seniors.

In plain terms: In a trial involving 84,500 seniors, the 13-valent pneumococcal vaccine cut cases of pneumonia caused by strains it targets by roughly 46%, and reduced instances of the most severe invasive infections by 75%. However, it showed no effect on pneumonia cases caused by any other pathogens, so it won’t prevent all types of pneumonia. The absolute confidence interval width is 95.2%.

Benefit: Researchers in the Netherlands randomly assigned 84,500 seniors over 65 to two groups for comparison. They used the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. Its effectiveness against pneumonia caused by strains it targets was 45.6%, with a 95% confidence interval of 21.8–62.5. This figure refers to the specific bacterial strains the vaccine can protect against. For the most dangerous form of pneumococcal disease, the effectiveness was 75.0% (95% CI 41.4–90.8). No protective effect was observed against pneumonia cases caused by any other pathogens.

Evidence grade: A

Sources: Bonten MJ, Huijts SM, Bolkenbaas M, et al. (2015). Polysaccharide conjugate vaccine against pneumococcal pneumonia in adults. New England Journal of Medicine, 372(12), 1114-1125. <https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1408544>

Notes: This vaccine only protects against the specific bacterial strains it targets; it does not prevent all types of pneumonia. The 23-valent polysaccharide vaccine commonly used for seniors in China is a different formulation from the 13-valent conjugate vaccine used in this trial, so the effectiveness figures here cannot be directly applied to that vaccine.

Read the complete Chinese source and notes

22. 65 岁以上打肺炎球菌疫苗

成本: 几百元。部分地区对老年人免费。

说人话: 8.45 万老人的试验里,13 价肺炎球菌疫苗把疫苗管得住的那几型肺炎挡掉约 46%,把最凶险的侵袭性感染挡掉 75%。但对「所有原因的肺炎」没看出效果,别指望它管住全部肺炎。

收益: 荷兰把 8.45 万名 65 岁以上老人随机分成两组来比。用的是 13 价肺炎球菌结合疫苗。它对疫苗覆盖型肺炎的效力是 45.6%。可信范围是 95.2% CI 21.8–62.5。疫苗覆盖型就是这支疫苗管得住的那几个菌型。对侵袭性肺炎球菌病的效力是 75.0%(95% CI 41.4–90.8),这是最凶险的那一类感染。对全部原因加在一起的肺炎,它没有效果

证据等级: A

来源: Bonten MJ, Huijts SM, Bolkenbaas M, et al. (2015). Polysaccharide conjugate vaccine against pneumococcal pneumonia in adults. New England Journal of Medicine, 372(12), 1114-1125. <https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1408544>

备注: 它只防疫苗覆盖的那几个型别,不是打了就不得肺炎。中国老年人常打的是 23 价多糖疫苗,和这项试验用的 13 价结合疫苗不是同一种,上面的效力数据不能直接套过去

Author's scope notes: 它只防疫苗覆盖的那几个型别,不是打了就不得肺炎。中国老年人常打的是 23 价多糖疫苗,和这项试验用的 13 价结合疫苗不是同一种,上面的效力数据不能直接套过去

YOUR PRIVATE LIST

Choose what to do with this idea

Original content by eternity4719 under CC BY 4.0. English translation is credited in the source notes. HowToLiveWorse adds a clearly labeled satirical response.

Full source and adaptation notes