Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25964461›Full record

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

Can immunological principles and cross-disciplinary science illuminate the path to vaccines for HIV and other global health challenges?

Christopher B Wilson, Christopher L Karp

Abstract readReview
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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Modulating the durability of anti-HIV gp120 antibody responses after vaccination: a comment on Wilson & Karp (2015).Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2015
    Article
  2. A reply to DeVico, Lewis & Gallo (2015).Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2015
    Article
  3. Biological challenges to effective vaccines in the developing world.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Christopher B WilsonGlobal Health Program, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 500 Fifth Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109, USA chris.wilson@gatesfoundation.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8481-7629
Christopher L KarpGlobal Health Program, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 500 Fifth Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaccines are one of the most impactful and cost-effective public health measures of the twentieth century. However, there remain great unmet needs to develop vaccines for globally burdensome infectious diseases and to allow more timely responses to emerging infectious disease threats. Recent advances in the understanding of immunological principles operative not just in model systems but in humans in concert with the development and application of powerful new tools for profiling human immune responses, in our understanding of pathogen variation and evolution, and in the elucidation of the structural aspects of antibody-pathogen interactions, have illuminated pathways by which these unmet needs might be addressed. Using these advances as foundation, we herein present a conceptual framework by which the discovery, development and iterative improvement of effective vaccines for HIV, malaria and other globally important infectious diseases might be accelerated.

Indexed as

Global HealthAIDS VaccinesCommunicable Disease ControlHIV InfectionsHumansAIDS VaccinesantibodyavidityHIVimmunemalariavaccine

Identifiers

PMID25964461
PMCPMC4527394

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.