Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28347504›Full record

ReviewVaccine2017

Platform technologies for modern vaccine manufacturing.

Hayley K Charlton Hume, Linda H L Lua

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Vaccine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Vaccines · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Why Physical Activity Should Be Considered in Clinical Trials for COVID-19 Vaccines: A Focus on Risk Groups.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Vaccine platform technologies and national security.The Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association · 2021
    Article
  16. VLP-factory™ and ADDomerCurrent protocols · 2021
    Article
  17. Review
  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

2 authors.

Hayley K Charlton HumeThe University of Queensland, Protein Expression Facility, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.
Linda H L LuaThe University of Queensland, Protein Expression Facility, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia. Electronic address: l.lua@uq.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Improved understanding of antigenic components and their interaction with the immune system, as supported by computational tools, permits a sophisticated approach to modern vaccine design. Vaccine platforms provide an effective tool by which strategically designed peptide and protein antigens are modularized to enhance their immunogenicity. These modular vaccine platforms can overcome issues faced by traditional vaccine manufacturing and have the potential to generate safe vaccines, rapidly and at a low cost. This review introduces two promising platforms based on virus-like particle and liposome, and discusses the methodologies and challenges.

Indexed as

Drug DesignAntigensHumansImmunogenicity, VaccineLiposomesTechnology, PharmaceuticalVaccines, Virus-Like ParticleViral ProteinsAntigensLiposomesVaccines, Virus-Like ParticleViral ProteinsLiposomeModularPlatform technologyVaccine designVirus-like particle

Identifiers

PMID28347504
PMCPMC7115529

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.