¿Hacerse una prueba de títulos de anticuerpos o un refuerzo de la vacuna triple vírica (MMR) en adultos durante el resurgimiento del sarampión de 2025, o no hacerlo?
Si actúas
Hacerse un titer o dosis de refuerzo de la triple vírica
0,001%
Si no actúas
Omitir el titer/refuerzo y confiar en la inmunidad infantil supuesta
6,0%
Porcentaje de quienes luego se arrepienten de cada elección. Las barras y el registro completo aparecen abajo.
Salud
Última revisión 2026-06-13
Calidad de la evidencia 4.1/5
Puntuación de revisión en ocho dimensiones según la
rúbrica de calidad
. Cada dimensión puntuada de 1 a 5.
D1 Verificación de fuentes
5/5
D2 Autoridad e independencia de las fuentes
5/5
D3 Precisión de la tasa de arrepentimiento
3/5
D4 Comparabilidad de las fuentes
3/5
D5 Patrón de Gilovich
4/5
D6 Calidad de la prosa
4/5
D7 Completitud de las advertencias
4/5
D8 Calidad de la muestra
5/5
Media4.1/5
Datos sustitutos — no existe ninguna encuesta directa sobre el arrepentimiento para esta decisión. Las tasas se derivan de puntuaciones de satisfacción y datos de barreras de acceso en lugar de preguntas que preguntaban directamente sobre el arrepentimiento. Ver advertencias más abajo.
Arrepentimiento por acción
Hacerse un titer o dosis de refuerzo de la triple vírica
0,001%
<0.001% — proxy: a serious adverse event (anaphylaxis) is the only material downside; redundancy in an already-immune adult is not a regret-worthy outcome
US adults who seek an MMR titer or a precautionary MMR dose (1963-67 killed-vaccine cohort, healthcare personnel, immunocompromised contacts) during the 2025 resurgence
Per dose administered
Arrepentimiento por inacción
Omitir el titer/refuerzo y confiar en la inmunidad infantil supuesta
6,0%
~6% — proxy: share of a US healthcare-worker serosurvey lacking a measles immunity marker (seronegative + equivocal); an upper bound on who carries an immunity gap, not a measured regret rate
US adults in the named higher-risk cohorts (1963-67 killed-vaccine recipients, healthcare personnel, immunocompromised) who skip serologic check or revaccination during the 2025 resurgence
Cross-sectional immunity gap during the 2025 resurgence
% que se arrepienten de esta elección
Hacerse un titer o dosis de refuerzo de la triple víricaOmitir el titer/refuerzo y confiar en la inmunidad infantil supuesta
0,001%6,0%
inaction dominates — Domina la inacción — la mayoría se arrepiente de no actuar.
Decisiones relacionadas
Decisiones semánticamente similares — mismo terreno, distintos compromisos.
Omitir o rechazar las vacunas recomendadas para adultos (sin vacuna anual contra la gripe, sin refuerzos de COVID, sin vacuna contra el herpes zóster a partir de los 50, sin vacuna de rescate del VPH)Seguir el calendario de vacunación recomendado para adultos (gripe anual, refuerzos de COVID-19, herpes zóster a partir de los 50, rescate del VPH hasta los 45)
Omitir o rechazar las vacunas de viaje recomendadas (sin hep A o tifoidea antes del sur/sudeste asiático, sin fiebre amarilla antes de África o Sudamérica endémica, sin encefalitis japonesa para la Asia rural)Recibir las vacunas de viaje recomendadas según las guías del CDC/OMS por destino antes de partir (hep A y tifoidea para destinos no occidentales, fiebre amarilla para zonas endémicas, JE para estancias rurales de ≥1 mes en Asia)
Omitir, retrasar o rechazar selectivamente las vacunas infantiles (sin SPR, sin DTPa, calendario alternativo o rechazo total)Seguir el calendario de vacunación infantil recomendado por los CDC/AAP (SPR, DTPa, polio, Hib, hepatitis B, varicela, etc., a tiempo)
Tomar un régimen de quimioprofilaxis antimalárica recomendado por los CDC/OMS (atovacuona-proguanil/Malarone, doxiciclina o mefloquina) antes, durante y después de viajar a un destino endémico de malariaOmitir la quimioprofilaxis antimalárica y depender únicamente de la prevención de picaduras de mosquitos (DEET, ropa tratada con permetrina, mallas, mosquiteros) para viajar a un destino endémico de malaria
Aplazar o cancelar el viaje planificado por enfermedad aguda, cirugía reciente, embarazo con complicaciones, inmunocompromiso o un brote activo en el destinoViajar según lo previsto a pesar de la enfermedad aguda, cirugía reciente, complicación del embarazo, inmunocompromiso durante un brote en el destino u otra advertencia de medicina aeroespacial
No survey asks adults whether they regret getting, or skipping, a measles booster during the 2025 resurgence. The few documented post-outbreak interviews run the other way: the parents of the Texas child who died in 2025 told reporters they stood by their decision not to vaccinate. So this pair is a proxy. The action side is anchored on the probability of a serious adverse event from the shot itself, and the inaction side on the share of the relevant cohort that carries no measurable measles immunity. Neither number is a regret rate; both are stand-ins, and the gap between them is wide.
The action downside is small and well-characterized. Anaphylaxis after an MMR-containing vaccine was reported to VAERS at 0.6 per million doses over 1990 to 2016, and the CDC’s Vaccine Information Statement describes a serious reaction as a “very remote chance.” The common outcomes — a sore arm, a brief fever, a mild rash — are not the kind of thing people later regret. The subtler point is that for the large majority of adults who turn out to have been immune already, the booster was redundant rather than harmful, and a redundant-but-protective dose tends to read as reassurance, not as a mistake. That is why the action proxy sits near the floor: the only genuinely regret-worthy action outcome is the rare serious event, on the order of one in a hundred thousand or rarer.
The inaction side is where the cohorts in the question matter. A US healthcare-worker serosurvey found 4% seronegative and 2% equivocal for measles IgG — a roughly 6% immunity gap — and a 2025 meta-analysis of 23,236 vaccinated people pooled seropositivity at 87.8%, falling to 84.3% among single-dose recipients. The 1963-67 killed-vaccine cohort is a separate, smaller group that ACIP explicitly tells to revaccinate, because the inactivated product conferred little durable protection. The catch is that an immunity gap is not the same as realized regret: with 2,288 confirmed US cases in 2025 against a population of roughly 340 million, the national attack rate stayed near 0.0007%, so most seronegative adults were never exposed at all. What gives the gap its weight is the severity tail — 11% of 2025 cases were hospitalized and there were deaths — so the rare intersection of “no immunity” and “exposed” is consequential. The honest reading: skipping leaves a measurable hole in protection for a minority of these cohorts, getting the dose closes it at trivial cost, and the realized-regret asymmetry favors acting even though almost no one in either group will ever face the outcome that would make the choice matter.
Fuentes: acción
Registro de evidencia
Cada número a continuación es lo que reportó cada fuente, con la cita textual en la que nos basamos y cómo llegamos a nuestra cifra. Haz clic en cualquier enlace para verificarlo directamente.
1/2 fuentes verificadas de forma independiente palabra por palabra frente a la fuente citada
[1]Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology / NCBI PMC — Anaphylaxis after vaccination reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, 1990–2016
Verificado
Revisado por pares
MMR-containing vaccine anaphylaxis reporting rate of 0.6 per 1 million doses distributed (overall vaccine rate 1.3 per million).
Extracto
“The estimated rate of anaphylaxis reported to VAERS during 1990 to 2016 after MMR was 0.6 per 1 million doses distributed.”
Datos de la fuente de
2019-01-01
Accedido
2026-06-13
Verificación
Extracto recuperado de forma independiente y confirmado palabra por palabra frente a la fuente citada durante nuestra auditoría de fundamentación.
Cálculo
Anaphylaxis is the canonical serious adverse event of MMR. 0.6 per 1,000,000 doses = 6e-7. The action regret_rate is set conservatively above that floor (1e-5) to absorb other rare serious events (febrile seizure, transient thrombocytopenia) the VIS lists. The dominant 'downside' of acting for an already-immune adult is a redundant dose, which yields peace of mind rather than regret, so it is not counted as regret. This is the matched-severity proxy: action's regret-worthy outcome is a serious AE, not 'the shot turned out unnecessary'.
[2]U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — MMR Vaccine Information Statement (VIS)
Informe gubernamental
Serious adverse events from MMR are characterized as a very remote chance; common effects are minor (sore arm, fever, mild rash).
Extracto
“As with any medicine, there is a very remote chance of a vaccine causing a severe allergic reaction, other serious injury, or death.”
Datos de la fuente de
2025-01-31
Accedido
2026-06-13
Cálculo
Qualitative confirmation that the action side's serious downside is 'very remote.' Establishes that the regret-worthy outcome of acting is rare and severe (an AE), distinct from the common, non-regret outcome of a redundant-but-protective dose. No numeric rate on this page; the numeric anchor is PMC6580415.
Fuentes: inacción
Registro de evidencia
Cada número a continuación es lo que reportó cada fuente, con la cita textual en la que nos basamos y cómo llegamos a nuestra cifra. Haz clic en cualquier enlace para verificarlo directamente.
3/6 fuentes verificadas de forma independiente palabra por palabra frente a la fuente citada
[1]Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology (PubMed) — Measles immunity in a population of healthcare workers
Verificado
Revisado por pares
Among 2,473 US healthcare workers tested for anti-measles IgG, 4% were seronegative and 2% equivocal — a ~6% immunity gap.
Extracto
“Ninety-three workers (4%) were seronegative, and 56 (2%) were equivocal.”
Datos de la fuente de
1994-01-01
Accedido
2026-06-13
Verificación
Extracto recuperado de forma independiente y confirmado palabra por palabra frente a la fuente citada durante nuestra auditoría de fundamentación.
Cálculo
Population-matched anchor: US healthcare workers, one of the named higher-risk cohorts. Seronegative (4%) + equivocal (2%) = 6% lacking a measles immunity marker → inaction proxy 0.06. This is an immunity-gap upper bound, not a realized-regret rate: most seronegative people are never exposed (2025 national attack rate ~ 2,288 / ~340M ~ 0.0007%). The proxy measures who is even eligible for potential regret if exposed.
[2]eClinicalMedicine (The Lancet Discovery Science) — Measles seropositivity in previously vaccinated individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Revisado por pares
Pooled seropositivity among vaccinated individuals was 87.8% (so ~12.2% seronegative); single-dose recipients 84.3% seropositive (~15.7% seronegative), across 23,236 individuals from 10 countries.
Extracto
“Pooled seropositivity was 87·8% (95% CI, 83·9%–91·2%) across 23,236 vaccinated individuals”
Datos de la fuente de
2025-01-01
Accedido
2026-06-13
Cálculo
Current (2025) pooled anchor confirming waning: ~12% of vaccinated adults are below seropositivity thresholds, rising to ~16% for single-dose recipients. Verified verbatim via Playwright (Lancet 403s WebFetch). Used to frame the spread; the 6% HCW figure is kept as the population-matched headline rather than the 12-16% pooled (mixed-country, assay-threshold) number to avoid overstating realized susceptibility.
[3]U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — Measles Vaccination for Specific Groups
Informe gubernamental
ACIP recommends revaccinating recipients of killed/inactivated or unknown-type measles vaccine from 1963-1967; healthcare personnel without presumptive immunity need 2 doses.
Extracto
“The ACIP recommends re-vaccinating anyone who received measles vaccine of unknown type, inactivated measles vaccine, or further attenuated measles vaccine accompanied by immunoglobulin or high-titer measles immune globulin (no longer available in the United States) during these years with 1 or 2 doses.”
Datos de la fuente de
2024-07-15
Accedido
2026-06-13
Cálculo
Establishes that the 1963-67 killed-vaccine cohort is functionally unprotected per ACIP and explicitly advised to revaccinate — the qualitative basis for why skipping carries downside for this cohort. This cohort is <5% of adults and overlaps the pre-1957 presumed-immune group, so it informs but does not set the numeric anchor.
[4]CDC MMWR / NCBI PMC — Measles Update — United States, January 1–April 17, 2025
Verificado
Informe gubernamental
Of 800 confirmed 2025 cases through April 17, 96% were unvaccinated or unknown status, 11% hospitalized, 3 deaths.
Extracto
“Overall, 771 (96%) patients have been unvaccinated or had unknown vaccination status”
Datos de la fuente de
2025-04-24
Accedido
2026-06-13
Verificación
Extracto recuperado de forma independiente y confirmado palabra por palabra frente a la fuente citada durante nuestra auditoría de fundamentación.
Cálculo
Establishes the severity tail that makes the immunity gap consequential: 11% of measles cases hospitalized, 3 deaths in the period, 96% of cases in the unvaccinated/unknown. The realized harm to someone in the immunity gap who is exposed is severe; this is what gives the inaction proxy its weight.
[5]U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — Measles Cases and Outbreaks — 2025 Data Summary
Verificado
Informe gubernamental
Full-year 2025: 2,288 confirmed US measles cases — the largest annual count since 1992.
Extracto
“For the full year of 2025, a total of 2,288 confirmed* measles cases were reported in the United States.”
Datos de la fuente de
2026-06-12
Accedido
2026-06-13
Verificación
Extracto recuperado de forma independiente y confirmado palabra por palabra frente a la fuente citada durante nuestra auditoría de fundamentación.
Cálculo
Sets the exposure backdrop: 2,288 cases / ~340M US population ~ 0.0007% national attack rate. This is why the 6% immunity-gap proxy is explicitly an upper bound on potential regret, not realized regret — exposure remained geographically concentrated and rare nationally even in the worst year since 1992.
[6]The Texas Tribune — Texas measles victim's parents stand by decision to not vaccinate
Artículo periodístico
After their unvaccinated 6-year-old daughter died of measles in Gaines County, Texas in February 2025, the parents said in a recorded statement that the death did not change their opposition to the MMR vaccine.
Extracto
“"We would absolutely not take the MMR," the mother said, adding that her stance on vaccination has not changed after her daughter's death.”
Datos de la fuente de
2025-03-20
Accedido
2026-07-03
Cálculo
Illustrative real-world counterpoint, not a numeric input to the 0.06 inaction proxy: a parent's decision about a child's routine MMR dose amid a measles death is a different population and decision from the adult titer/booster question this entry covers, and one family's account is not a survey. Cited to support the body-text point that documented post-outbreak reactions do not uniformly run toward regretting non-vaccination.
Advertencias
proxy_only: there is no direct "regret getting/skipping an MMR booster" survey; both rates are stand-ins. The inaction rate (6%) is the share of a US healthcare-worker serosurvey lacking an immunity marker (seronegative + equivocal), i.e. an upper bound on who is even eligible for regret, NOT a measured regret rate — most seronegative people are never exposed (2025 national attack rate ~0.0007%). The susceptibility spread is wide and assay-dependent: 6% (US HCW IgG), 12.2% (2025 pooled meta-analysis), up to ~37.6% in one Olmsted County, MN commercial-assay study whose high figure is largely a below-titer-threshold artifact (titer below cutoff does not equal susceptible, because anamnestic memory-B-cell immunity is not captured) and is therefore excluded from the anchor. The 1963-67 killed-vaccine cohort is <5% of adults and overlaps the pre-1957 presumed-immune group, so it is a qualitative ACIP-revaccinate flag rather than the numeric anchor. The action anaphylaxis figure (0.6/million) is a passive-surveillance VAERS reporting rate, not a measured incidence. The meta-analysis pools 10 countries, not US-only. CDC publishes immunity and case data, not regret; this entry should not be read as advice to get or skip a dose.
