SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017
Vaccines for the common cold.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vaccines for the common cold.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Intake of 25-Hydroxyvitamin DNutrients · 2020Trial
- Next-Generation Nucleic Acid-Based Diagnostics for Viral Pathogens: Lessons Learned from the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Effects of Bairui granules (Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- The Path Towards Progress: A Critical Review to Advance the Science of the Female and Male Athlete Triad and Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Review
- Global burden of upper respiratory infections in 204 countries and territories, from 1990 to 2019.EClinicalMedicine · 2021Article
- Boosting nitric oxide in stress and respiratory infection: Potential relevance for asthma and COVID-19.Brain, behavior, & immunity - health · 2021Review
- Safety and efficacy of iota-carrageenan nasal spray in treatment and prevention of the common cold.Medicine and pharmacy reports · 2021Review
- Article
- Home dampness-related exposures increase the risk of common colds among preschool children in Shanghai, China: Modified by household ventilation.Building and environment · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe common cold is a spontaneously remitting infection of the upper respiratory tract, characterised by a runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing, cough, malaise, sore throat, and fever (usually < 37.8º C). The widespread morbidity caused by the common cold worldwide is related to its ubiquitousness rather than its severity. The development of vaccines for the common cold has been difficult because of antigenic variability of the common cold virus and the indistinguishable multiple other viruses and even bacteria acting as infective agents. There is uncertainty regarding the efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing the common cold in healthy people. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011 and previously updated in 2013.
objectivesTo assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (September 2016), MEDLINE (1948 to September 2016), Embase (1974 to September 2016), CINAHL (1981 to September 2016), and LILACS (1982 to September 2016). We also searched three trials registers for ongoing studies and four websites for additional trials (February 2017). We included no language or date restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any virus vaccines compared with placebo to prevent the common cold in healthy people. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted trial data. We resolved disagreements by discussion or by consulting a third review author. MAIN
resultsWe found no additional RCTs for inclusion in this update. This review includes one RCT dating from the 1960s with an overall high risk of bias. The RCT included 2307 healthy participants, all of whom were included in analyses. This trial compared the effect of an adenovirus vaccine against placebo. No statistically significant difference in common cold incidence was found: there were 13 (1.14%) events in 1139 participants in the vaccines group and 14 (1.19%) events in 1168 participants in the placebo group (risk ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 2.02; P = 0.90). No adverse events related to the live vaccine were reported. The quality of the evidence was low due to limitations in methodological quality and a wide 95% confidence interval. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThis Cochrane Review was based on one study with low-quality evidence. We found no conclusive results to support the use of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people compared with placebo. We identified a need for well-designed, adequately powered RCTs to investigate vaccines for the common cold in healthy people. Any future trials on medical treatments for preventing the common cold should assess a variety of virus vaccines for this condition. Outcome measures should include common cold incidence, vaccine safety, and mortality related to the vaccine.
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.