Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25826194›Full record

ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2015

Against vaccine assay secrecy.

Matthew Herder, Todd F Hatchette, Scott A Halperin, Joanne M Langley

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Matthew Herdera Faculties of Medicine and Law; Health Law Institute ; Dalhousie University ; Halifax , Nova Scotia , Canada.
Todd F Hatchette
Scott A Halperin
Joanne M Langley
Dalhousie University · CACzech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Microbiology · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increasing the transparency of the evidence base behind health interventions such as pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices, has become a major point of critique, conflict, and policy focus in recent years. Yet the lack of publicly available information regarding the immunogenicity assays upon which many important, widely used vaccines are based has received no attention to date. In this paper we draw attention to this critical public health problem by reporting on our efforts to secure vaccine assay information in respect of 10 vaccines through Canada's access to information law. We argue, under Canadian law, that the public health interest in having access to the methods for these laboratory procedures should override claims by vaccine manufacturers and regulators that this information is proprietary; and, we call upon several actors to take steps to ensure greater transparency with respect to vaccine assays, including regulators, private firms, researchers, research institutions, research funders, and journal editors.

Indexed as

Access to InformationCanadaConfidentialityHumansVaccinesVaccinesaccess to information lawintellectual propertytransparencyvaccine assays

Identifiers

PMID25826194
PMCPMC4514357
OpenAlexW2008812064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.