ReviewViruses2015
Development of Novel Vaccines against Enterovirus-71.
Review in Viruses, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 150 citations in OpenAlex.
- A randomised trial of a bioreactor-produced EV-A71 vaccine for endemic control in children.NPJ vaccines · 2026Article
- Synergetic association between coxsackievirus A16 genotype evolution and recombinant form shifts.Virus evolution · 2024Article
- Assessment of Enterovirus Antibodies during Early Childhood Using a Multiplex Immunoassay.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Article
- A novel rat CVB1-VP1 monoclonal antibody 3A6 detects a broad range of enteroviruses.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Different responses of weather factors on hand, foot and mouth disease in three different climate areas of Gansu, China.BMC infectious diseases · 2018Article
- Identification of molecular determinants of cell culture growth characteristics of Enterovirus 71.Virology journal · 2016Article
- ATP1B3: a virus-induced host factor against EV71 replication by up-regulating the production of type-I interferons.Virology · 2016Article
- Advanced Nanobiomaterials: Vaccines, Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The hand, foot and mouth disease is caused by a group of Enteroviruses such as Enterovirus 71 (EV-A71) and Coxsackievirus CV-A5, CV-A8, and CV-A16. Mild symptoms of EV-A71 infection in children range from high fever, vomiting, rashes and ulcers in mouth but can produce more severe symptoms such as brainstem and cerebellar encephalitis, leading up to cardiopulmonary failure and death. The lack of vaccines and antiviral drugs against EV-A71 highlights the urgency of developing preventive and treatment agents against EV-A71 to prevent further fatalities. Research groups have developed experimental inactivated vaccines, recombinant Viral Protein 1 (VP1) vaccine and virus-like particles (VLPs). The inactivated EV-A71 vaccine is considered the safest viral vaccine, as there will be no reversion to the infectious wild type strain. The recombinant VP1 vaccine is a cost-effective immunogen, while VLPs contain an arrangement of epitopes that can elicit neutralizing antibodies against the virus. As each type of vaccine has its advantages and disadvantages, increased studies are required in the development of such vaccines, whereby high efficacy, long-lasting immunity, minimal risk to those vaccinated, safe and easy production, low cost, dispensing the need for refrigeration and convenient delivery are the major goals in their design.
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.