ArticleVaccines2013
What Has 30 Years of HIV Vaccine Research Taught Us?
Article in Vaccines, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Progress and Recent Developments in HIV Vaccine Research.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Evolution of drug delivery systems: From 1950 to 2020 and beyond.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2022Article
- Establishing Correlates of Protection for Vaccine Development: Considerations for the Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccine Field.Viral immunology · 2018Review
- Development of a Preventive HIV Vaccine Requires Solving Inverse Problems Which Is Unattainable by Rational Vaccine Design.Frontiers in immunology · 2017Article
- Structure-Based Reverse Vaccinology Failed in the Case of HIV Because it Disregarded Accepted Immunological Theory.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016Review
- HIV Vaccine Awareness Day: sustaining the momentum.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2016Article
- Erratum.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2016Article
- Editorial: Paradigm Changes are Required in HIV Vaccine Research.Frontiers in immunology · 2015Article
- Why Does the Molecular Structure of Broadly Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibodies Isolated from Individuals Infected with HIV-1 not Inform the Rational Design of an HIV-1 Vaccine?AIMS public health · 2015Review
- A New Scientific Paradigm may be Needed to Finally Develop an HIV Vaccine.Frontiers in immunology · 2015Review
- More Surprises in the Development of an HIV Vaccine.Frontiers in immunology · 2014Article
- An Outdated Notion of Antibody Specificity is One of the Major Detrimental Assumptions of the Structure-Based Reverse Vaccinology Paradigm, Which Prevented It from Helping to Develop an Effective HIV-1 Vaccine.Frontiers in immunology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When HIV was discovered and established as the cause of AIDS in 1983-1984, many people believed that a vaccine would be rapidly developed. However, 30 years have passed and we are still struggling to develop an elusive vaccine. In trying to achieve that goal, different scientific paradigms have been explored. Although major progress has been made in understanding the scientific basis for HIV vaccine development, efficacy trials have been critical in moving the field forward. Major lessons learned are: the development of an HIV vaccine is an extremely difficult challenge; the temptation of just following the fashion should be avoided; clinical trials are critical, especially large-scale efficacy trials; HIV vaccine research will require long-term commitment; and sustainable collaborations are needed to accelerate the development of an HIV vaccine. Concrete actions must be implemented with the sense of urgency imposed by the severity of the AIDS epidemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.