Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23883969›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Immunology2013

Applications of nanotechnology for immunology.

Douglas M Smith, Jakub K Simon, James R Baker

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Immunology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 291 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
291citing 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

291 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Frontiers in bacterial outer membrane vesicles: From basic characteristics to cancer therapy.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Douglas M SmithMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-5648, USA. smitdoug@med.umich.edu
Jakub K Simon
James R Baker

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanotechnology uses the unique properties of objects that function as a unit within the overall size range of 1-1,000 nanometres. The engineering of nanostructure materials, including nanoparticles, nanoemulsions or nanotubules, holds great promise for the development of new immunomodulatory agents, as such nanostructures can be used to more effectively manipulate or deliver immunologically active components to target sites. Successful applications of nanotechnology in the field of immunology will enable new generations of vaccines, adjuvants and immunomodulatory drugs that aim to improve clinical outcomes in response to a range of infectious and non-infectious diseases.

Indexed as

Drug CarriersImmunomodulationNanoparticlesNanostructuresNanotubesAdjuvants, ImmunologicHumansVaccinationAdjuvants, ImmunologicDrug Carriers

Identifiers

PMID23883969
PMCPMC7097370

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.