Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25520149›Full record

ReviewClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2015

Use and clinical interpretation of pneumococcal antibody measurements in the evaluation of humoral immune function.

Thomas M Daly, Harry R Hill

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Response to Tetanus and Pneumococcal Vaccination Following Administration of Ixekizumab in Healthy Participants.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2017
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Diagnostic Vaccination in Clinical Practice.Frontiers in immunology · 2021
    Article
  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

2 authors.

Thomas M DalyRobert J. Tomsich Department of Pathology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA dalyt@ccf.org.
Harry R HillARUP Laboratories, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA Departments of Pathology, Pediatrics, and Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pneumococcal vaccination is a commonly used technique for assessing the humoral immune status of a patient suspected of having immunodeficiency. Interpretation of what constitutes an adequate response, however, can be challenging. This is due to the complexity of the data generated from serotype-specific assays, historical variations in the assays used to measure pneumococcal antibodies, and varying recommendations on the relevant cut points that define response. In this review, we summarize the historical evolution of assays used for this purpose and discuss the analytical considerations that have influenced published data. We also examine current clinical recommendations for defining an adequate response to vaccination, with a particular focus on the interpretation of serotype-specific data generated by multiplex assays.

Indexed as

Antibodies, BacterialClinical Laboratory TechniquesHumansImmune SystemImmunologic Deficiency SyndromesPneumococcal VaccinesStreptococcus pneumoniaeAntibodies, BacterialPneumococcal Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID25520149
PMCPMC4308869

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.