Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24925139›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Immunology2014

From empiricism to rational design: a personal perspective of the evolution of vaccine development.

Ennio De Gregorio, Rino Rappuoli

Abstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Immunology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 100 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
100citing 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

100 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Pangenome-GuidedPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Leaf Saponins ofPharmaceutics · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. The Use of Next-Generation Sequencing in Personalized Medicine.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. 4CMenB journey to the 10-year anniversary and beyond.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Genetic Engineering ofMicroorganisms · 2023
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

40 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.

Ennio De GregorioNovartis Vaccines, Via Fiorentina 1, 53100 Siena, Italy.
Rino RappuoliNovartis Vaccines, Via Fiorentina 1, 53100 Siena, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaccination, which is the most effective medical intervention that has ever been introduced, originated from the observation that individuals who survived a plague or smallpox would not get the disease twice. To mimic the protective effects of natural infection, Jenner - and later Pasteur - inoculated individuals with attenuated or killed disease-causing agents. This empirical approach inspired a century of vaccine development and the effective prophylaxis of many infectious diseases. From the 1980s, several waves of new technologies have enabled the development of novel vaccines that would not have been possible using the empirical approach. The technological revolution in the field of vaccination is now continuing, and it is delivering novel and safer vaccines. In this Timeline article, we provide our views on the transition from empiricism to rational vaccine design.

Indexed as

Communicable Disease ControlAdjuvants, ImmunologicAIDS VaccinesGlycoconjugatesHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHistory, AncientHistory, MedievalHumansInfluenza VaccinesMalaria VaccinesPlague VaccineSmallpoxTuberculosis VaccinesVaccinationVaccinesAdjuvants, ImmunologicAIDS VaccinesGlycoconjugatesInfluenza VaccinesMalaria VaccinesPlague VaccineTuberculosis VaccinesVaccinesVaccines, DNA

Identifiers

PMID24925139
PMCPMC7096907

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.