Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19240757›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Immunology2009

B-cell responses to vaccination at the extremes of age.

Claire-Anne Siegrist, Richard Aspinall

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Immunology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 344 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
344citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

344 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Protective near-germline antibodies to malaria elicited by RTS,S/AS01bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Intestinal Mucosal Immune Responses to Novel Oral Poliovirus Vaccine Type 2 in Healthy Newborns.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026
    Article
  20. Review

284 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Claire-Anne SiegristDepartments of Pathology-Immunology and Pediatrics, WHO Collaborative Center for Neonatal Vaccinology, Medical Faculty of University of Geneva, Centre Medical Universitaire, Geneva 4, Switzerland. claire-anne.siegrist@unige.ch
Richard Aspinall

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Infants and the elderly share a high vulnerability to infections and therefore have specific immunization requirements. Inducing potent and sustained B-cell responses is as challenging in infants as it is in older subjects. Several mechanisms to explain the decreased B-cell responses at the extremes of age apply to both infants and the elderly. These include intrinsic B-cell limitations as well as numerous microenvironmental factors in lymphoid organs and the bone marrow. This Review describes the mechanisms that shape B-cell responses at the extremes of age and how they could be taken into account to design more effective immunization strategies for these high-risk age groups.

Indexed as

VaccinationAgedAged, 80 and overAgingAnimalsB-LymphocytesCommunicable DiseasesHumansImmunologic MemoryInfantInfant, NewbornMiceVaccinesVaccines

Identifiers

PMID19240757

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.