Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17302888›Full record

ReviewClinical and experimental immunology2007

Translational mini-review series on vaccines: Development and evaluation of improved vaccines against tuberculosis.

C Sander, H McShane

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical and experimental immunology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C SanderUniversity of Oxford, CCVTM, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK. clare.sander@ndm.ox.ac.uk
H McShane
Churchill Hospital · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 076943
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tuberculosis (TB) continues to be a major global health disaster, despite the widespread use of BCG and effective drug therapies. The development of an efficacious new TB vaccine would be an important component of disease control in the future. Many approaches are being utilised to enhance understanding of the requirements of a successful vaccine. Numerous vaccines are being designed and assessed in a series of animal models, with a few progressing to clinical trials. Here, the steps involved in the development and evaluation of TB vaccines will be discussed, including description of the most frequently used animal models and the processes involved in advancing vaccines to phase III trials.

Indexed as

Tuberculosis VaccinesAnimalsBCG VaccineClinical Trials as TopicDisease Models, AnimalHumansMiceResearch DesignTuberculosisVaccinationBCG VaccineTuberculosis Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID17302888
PMCPMC1810501
OpenAlexW2050110140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.