Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19953309›Full record

ReviewPharmaceutical research2010

Mucosal vaccines: recent progress in understanding the natural barriers.

Olga Borges, Filipa Lebre, Dulce Bento, Gerrit Borchard, Hans E Junginger

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceutical research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. An update on oral drug deliveryActa pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2021
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Controlled analysis of nanoparticle charge on mucosal and systemic antibody responses following pulmonary immunization.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Olga BorgesCentre for Neuroscience and Cell Biology & Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Pólo das Ciências da Saúde, Azinhaga de Santa Comba, 3000-548, Coimbra, Portugal. olga@ci.uc.pt
Filipa Lebre
Dulce Bento
Gerrit Borchard
Hans E Junginger

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It has long been known that protection against pathogens invading the organism via mucosal surfaces correlates better with the presence of specific antibodies in local secretions than with serum antibodies. The most effective way to induce mucosal immunity is to administer antigens directly to the mucosal surface. The development of vaccines for mucosal application requires antigen delivery systems and immunopotentiators that efficiently facilitate the presentation of the antigen to the mucosal immune system. This review provides an overview of the events within mucosal tissues that lead to protective mucosal immune responses. The understanding of those biological mechanisms, together with knowledge of the technology of vaccines and adjuvants, provides guidance on important technical aspects of mucosal vaccine design. Not being exhaustive, this review also provides information related to modern adjuvants, including polymeric delivery systems and immunopotentiators.

Indexed as

Drug DesignAnimalsDrug Delivery SystemsHumansImmunity, MucosalMucous MembranePractice Guidelines as TopicVaccinesVaccines

Identifiers

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.