The article, Vaccine failures and vaccine effectiveness in children during measles outbreaks in new South Wales, March–May 2006 is written by a number of writers. The article talks about measles. The writers wrote this article after conducting a study to find out if the clinical presentation of children infected with measles showed a difference in relation to their vaccination status. The writers also sort the reasons to why the vaccine failed and estimated measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine efficacy, among children living in South Wales. The writers article was triggered by a measles outbreak in South Wales that took place between March and May 2006.
As the authors seek to identify the reason behind the outbreak, they note that there are two types of measles infections. There are those children who are infected and have never been immunised against measles, and there are those who had been immunised as infants but still contracted measles. The writers conduct a study as to why the immunised children still got infected with measles yet they were vaccinated.
The authors also compare the infection rate between the children who had a primary vaccination and those who were not immunized. Their study notes that the infection was high among those not previously vaccinated. Those that had been vaccinated also showed milder symptoms. In the article, the authors also point out that there were a few cases of children who still developed immune against the secondary vaccine. However, the writers did not note down the reasons as to why there were such cases.
The authors support their study findings with bar graphs and tables. The bar charts used are comparison bar charts. They compare the rate of infection among infants, children between 1 – 14 years, and children above 14 years, who are considered to be adults. The authors also back up their study report using factual data in the form of percentages and statistics. The authors also compare cases of measles outbreaks in developed countries to developing countries.
The authors have structured their article into different sections. They present the article in two columns on an A4 size page. The article is categorised into the following sections: an abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion. The abstract gives a general insight of what is contained in the article. The introduction introduces the problem and the target of the study. The methods section shows the methods used to carry out the various tests and methods used to gather information. The next section that follows is results section. This section gives out the findings from the methods used. It is in this section where tables and charts are used. The section that follows is discussion. This section discuss the findings, concludes the article and also gives recommendations. The authors also point out places that need further investigation. The authors advance their argument through these headings. The sections help the articles to flow in a logical order. They arrange their information from the start of the study to the findings and discussions.