Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26344948›Full record

ReviewVaccines2015

Assaying the Potency of Influenza Vaccines.

Philip D Minor

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Vaccines, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Sources of variance in the results of a commercial bovine immunoglobulin G radial immunodiffusion assay.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Clinical Development of mRNA Vaccines: Challenges and Opportunities.Current topics in microbiology and immunology · 2022
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Philip D MinorNational Institute for Biological Standards and Control/MHRA, Blanche Lane, Potters Bar, Hertfordshire EN6 3QG, UK. Philip.Minor@nibsc.org.
National Institute for Biological Standards and Control · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The potency of vaccines must be determined to ensure that the appropriate dose is given. The manufacture and assessment of influenza vaccines are complicated by the continuously changing nature of the pathogen, which makes efficacy estimates difficult but also confounds attempts to produce a well-validated, consistent potency assay. Single radial diffusion has been used for decades and provides a relatively simple way to measure the amount of biologically active materials present in the vaccine. It requires reagents, which are updated on a regular, frequently yearly, basis and alternative methods continue to be sought.

Indexed as

Essential Regulatory LaboratoriesInfluenza Collaborating Centresinfluenza vaccinepotencyreagent calibrationSRD

Identifiers

PMID26344948
PMCPMC4494238
OpenAlexW2058570170

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.