Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26344623›Full record

ReviewVaccines2014

HIV DNA Vaccine: Stepwise Improvements Make a Difference.

Barbara K Felber, Antonio Valentin, Margherita Rosati, Cristina Bergamaschi, George N Pavlakis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Vaccines, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

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

5 authors.

Barbara K FelberHuman Retrovirus Pathogenesis Section, Vaccine Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at Frederick, P.O. Box B, Frederick, MD 21702, USA. barbara.felber@nih.gov.
Antonio ValentinHuman Retrovirus Section, Vaccine Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at Frederick, P.O. Box B, Frederick, MD 21702, USA. antonio.valentin@nih.gov.
Margherita RosatiHuman Retrovirus Section, Vaccine Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at Frederick, P.O. Box B, Frederick, MD 21702, USA. margherita.rosati@nih.gov.
Cristina BergamaschiHuman Retrovirus Pathogenesis Section, Vaccine Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at Frederick, P.O. Box B, Frederick, MD 21702, USA. cristina.bergamaschi@nih.gov.
George N PavlakisHuman Retrovirus Section, Vaccine Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at Frederick, P.O. Box B, Frederick, MD 21702, USA. george.pavlakis@nih.gov.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inefficient DNA delivery methods and low expression of plasmid DNA have been major obstacles for the use of plasmid DNA as vaccine for HIV/AIDS. This review describes successful efforts to improve DNA vaccine methodology over the past ~30 years. DNA vaccination, either alone or in combination with other methods, has the potential to be a rapid, safe, and effective vaccine platform against AIDS. Recent clinical trials suggest the feasibility of its translation to the clinic.

Indexed as

cytokineDNA deliveryDNA expressionelectroporationimmunogenicitymacaqueplasmidvaccination

Identifiers

PMID26344623
PMCPMC4494255

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.