Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2025 Jan 4.
Published in final edited form as: Risk Anal. 2013 Mar 22;33(4):703–749. doi: 10.1111/risa.12044

Table XIII.

Comparison of Modeled and Observed Age-Specific Paralytic Incidence for Situations that Allow Meaningful Comparisona

Paralytic cases (percentage of total cases)
Age group Reported Model

The Netherlands, 1992–1993 (79)b
0–4 years 14 (20%) 12 (17%)
5–9 years 8 (11%) 8 (12%)
10–19 years 16 (23%) 14 (20%)
20–29 years 16 (23%) 15 (22%)
30–39 years 14 (20%) 12 (17%)
≥40 years 3 (4%) 9 (13%)
Albania, 1996 (57)
0–9 years 19 (14%) 12 (10%)
10–19 years 42 (30%) 62 (51%)
20–39 years 76 (55%) 47 (39%)
≥40 years 1 (1%) 1 (1%)
Tajikistan, 2010 (3)
<1 year 90 (20%) 104 (23%)
1–4 years 208 (45%) 217 (47%)
5–14 years 107 (23%) 108 (4%)
≥15 years 53 (12%) 29 (6%)
Madura, 2005 (100)c
0–4 years 36 (80%) 75 (90%)
≥5 years 9 (20%) 8 (10%)
Northern Nigeria, 2003–2011 d
0–4 years Not available 5,099 (94%)
≥5 years Not available 282 (6%)
Northern India, 2002–2010 (112)e
0–4 years 3,286 (97%) 4,784 (95%)
≥5 years 102 (3%) 257 (5%)
a

For Cuba and Haiti, the number of cases remains too low for meaningful comparison; for the USA, the model does not produces a realistic age distribution of cases because it averages out local inter-epidemic periods with low seasonality to yield relatively consistent national totals in the pre-vaccine era.

b

Reported numbers include 10 nonparalytic cases.

c

Cases from OPV-related type 1 virus in all reversion stages combined (excluding recipient vaccine-associated paralytic polio).

d

Cases from all types and all reversion stages combined (excluding recipient vaccine-associated paralytic polio).

e

Cases for Bihar and Western Uttar Pradesh combined.