Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article

Apparent (typing?) ERROR - conclusion states the OPPOSITE of the findings reported in the body of the article

Posted by vaccinfo on 29 Oct 2013 at 11:02 GMT

This article is interesting in relation to the serious, and apparently increasing, problem of under-reporting of vaccine adverse effects.

However there appears to be a major error in the wording in the Conclusion, as it states the exact opposite of the finding reported in the body of the article, i.e. in the last sentence of the conclusion, it reads:

“This study also shows that the diminishing trend in post vaccine ADEM reporting related to Diphtheria, Pertussis, Tetanus, Polio and Haemophilus Influentiae type B and human papilloma virus vaccine groups is most likely due to a decline in vaccine coverage indicative of a reduced attention to this adverse drug reaction.”

I think that the word "not" has been inadvertently omitted so that instead it is supposed to read:

“This study also shows that the diminishing trend in post vaccine ADEM reporting related to Diphtheria, Pertussis, Tetanus, Polio and Haemophilus Influentiae type B and human papilloma virus vaccine groups is most likely NOT due to a decline in vaccine coverage, indicative of a reduced attention to this adverse drug reaction.” (capping, for highlighting purposes, of the word "not" included by me)

This error is a major one and ought to be corrected.

(There is additionally a spelling error in the conclusion – “Influentiae” ought to read “Influenzae”)

No competing interests declared.

RE: Apparent (typing?) ERROR - conclusion states the OPPOSITE of the findings reported in the body of the article

Sonia_Radice replied to vaccinfo on 30 Oct 2013 at 16:19 GMT

we do thank you for bringing this to our attention
Indeed in the last sentence of the abstract the word “NOT” has been inadvertently omitted between the words "likely" and "due", thus making the sentence conveying a massage opposite to the one it should have conveyed.

We have already asked the Editor to correct this in the manuscript

best regards

Sonia Radice

No competing interests declared.