Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25964453›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2015

Malnutrition and vaccination in developing countries.

Andrew J Prendergast

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 101 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

101 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 162 citations in OpenAlex.

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

41 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 3 countries.

Andrew J PrendergastCentre for Paediatrics, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA Zvitambo Institute for Maternal and Child Health Research, Harare, Zimbabwe a.prendergast@qmul.ac.uk.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Wellcome Trust 093768/Z/10/ZWellcome Trust 100714
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Malnutrition contributes to an estimated 45% of deaths among children under 5 years of age in developing countries, predominantly due to infections. Malnourished children therefore stand to benefit hugely from vaccination, but malnutrition has been described as the most common immunodeficiency globally, suggesting that they may not be able to respond effectively to vaccines. The immunology of malnutrition remains poorly characterized, but is associated with impairments in mucosal barrier integrity, and innate and adaptive immune dysfunction. Despite this, the majority of malnourished children can mount a protective immune response following vaccination, although the timing, quality and duration of responses may be impaired. This paper reviews the evidence for vaccine immunogenicity in malnourished children, discusses the importance of vaccination in prevention of malnutrition and highlights evidence gaps in our current knowledge.

Indexed as

VaccinationChild, PreschoolHumansInfantMalnutritionchildrendeveloping countriesimmunologymalnutritionvaccination

Identifiers

PMID25964453
PMCPMC4527386
OpenAlexW2152704460

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.