Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27936348›Full record

ReviewHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2017

Current prospects and future challenges for nasal vaccine delivery.

Helmy Yusuf, Vicky Kett

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing 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

70 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Spray Drying of Bacterial Membrane Vesicles for Vaccine Delivery.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Helmy Yusufa School of Pharmacy, Queen's University of Belfast , Belfast , Antrim , UK.
Vicky Kettb School of Pharmacy, Queen's University of Belfast , Belfast , Antrim , UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nasal delivery offers many benefits over traditional approaches to vaccine administration. These include ease of administration without needles that reduces issues associated with needlestick injuries and disposal. Additionally, this route offers easy access to a key part of the immune system that can stimulate other mucosal sites throughout the body. Increased acceptance of nasal vaccine products in both adults and children has led to a burgeoning pipeline of nasal delivery technology. Key challenges and opportunities for the future will include translating in vivo data to clinical outcomes. Particular focus should be brought to designing delivery strategies that take into account the broad range of diseases, populations and healthcare delivery settings that stand to benefit from this unique mucosal route.

Indexed as

Immunity, MucosalAdministration, IntranasalHumansVaccinesVaccinesinfluenzamucosalnasalneedle-freevaccine

Identifiers

PMID27936348
PMCPMC5287317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.