Burden of Lassa fever disease in pregnant women and children and options for prevention
Vaccine·
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126479
- PMID
- 39488189
- PMCID
- —
- OpenAlex
- W4403981448
- Study type
- Systematic review
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Article type
- journal-article
- Integrity
- current
Why this research matters now
The abstract identifies substantial evidence gaps for diagnosis, management, prevention, and vaccine evaluation in pregnant women, neonates, and children. It highlights the need for research and vaccine trials that include these groups with safety monitoring and risk-mitigation procedures.
Structured evidence summary
Research question
The review assessed the reported burden and clinical impact of Lassa fever among pregnant women, neonates, and children, and considered implications for prevention and vaccine development.
Study design
This was a systematic review of published literature on Lassa fever in the specified populations. The abstract also reports findings from 16 paediatric studies and two neonatal studies, together with a systematic review concerning pregnant women.
Population and setting
The review concerned pregnant women, neonates, and children affected by Lassa fever in West African endemic contexts. The supplied abstract does not provide enough detail to characterize the individual study locations or participant selection.
Main findings
Reported case-fatality estimates ranged from 6% to 63% across 16 paediatric studies, and were 66.7% and 75.0% in two neonatal studies. The review reports a 33.73% case-fatality rate among pregnant women, with miscarriage, stillbirth, and intrauterine death described among adverse fetal outcomes. Altered mental status, anasarca, bleeding, and reduced urine output were identified as risk factors for death in children.
Public-health relevance
The abstract identifies substantial evidence gaps for diagnosis, management, prevention, and vaccine evaluation in pregnant women, neonates, and children. It highlights the need for research and vaccine trials that include these groups with safety monitoring and risk-mitigation procedures.
Important limitations
The abstract states that supporting data are sparse and that comprehensive information for these populations is lacking. The supplied summary is also limited to a single article's abstract and metadata; the original paper is required for decision-grade assessment of search methods, study quality, heterogeneity, and applicability.
GIDS interpretation
The article is discoverable under Lassa fever, surveillance, and vaccination classifications and provides context on evidence gaps in high-risk populations. It does not establish or confirm a current surveillance signal.
Related GIDS surveillance
Literature context does not validate, explain, or change a surveillance signal. Exact and contextual relationships are shown separately.
Evidence relationships
This article has 10 auditable classifier relationships to diseases, places, topics, and study design.