Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22044118›Full record

ReviewImmunology2012

T-cell-inducing vaccines - what's the future.

Sarah C Gilbert

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Immunology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 107 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
107citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

107 citing papers in PubMed, 169 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. AnScience immunology · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

47 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sarah C GilbertJenner Institute, University of Oxford, UK. Sarah.gilbert@ndm.ox.ac.uk
Jenner Institute · GB

Funding

Medical Research CouncilWellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the twentieth century vaccine development has moved from the use of attenuated or killed micro-organisms to protein sub-unit vaccines, with vaccine immunogenicity assessed by measuring antibodies induced by vaccination. However, for many infectious diseases T cells are an important part of naturally acquired protective immune responses, and inducing these by vaccination has been the aim of much research. The progress that has been made in developing effective T-cell-inducing vaccines against viral and parasitic diseases such as HIV and malaria is discussed, along with recent developments in therapeutic vaccine development for chronic viral infections and cancer. Although many ways of inducing T cells by vaccination have been assessed, the majority result in low level, non-protective responses. Sufficient clinical research has now been conducted to establish that replication-deficient viral vectored vaccines lead the field in inducing strong and broad responses, and efficacy studies of T-cell-inducing vaccines against a number of diseases are finally demonstrating that this is a valid approach to filling the gaps in our defence against not only infectious disease, but some forms of cancer.

Indexed as

Lymphocyte ActivationAnimalsChronic DiseaseHumansMalaria VaccinesMiceNeoplasmsT-LymphocytesTuberculosis VaccinesVaccinesViral VaccinesVirus DiseasesMalaria VaccinesTuberculosis VaccinesVaccinesViral Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID22044118
PMCPMC3246649
OpenAlexW1588690200

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.