Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31010134›Full record

ReviewTropical medicine and infectious disease2019

Serologic Tools and Strategies to Support Intervention Trials to Combat Zika Virus Infection and Disease.

Matthew H Collins

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Tropical medicine and infectious disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Zika virus serological diagnosis: commercial tests and monoclonal antibodies as tools.The journal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases · 2020
    Review
  7. 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.

Matthew H CollinsHope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Emory University, Decatur, GA 30030, USA. matthew.collins@emory.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-7974-1933
Emory University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Zika virus is an emerging mosquito-borne flavivirus that recently caused a large epidemic in Latin America characterized by novel disease phenotypes, including Guillain-Barré syndrome, sexual transmission, and congenital anomalies, such as microcephaly. This epidemic, which was declared an international public health emergency by the World Health Organization, has highlighted shortcomings in our current understanding of, and preparation for, emerging infectious diseases in general, as well as challenges that are specific to Zika virus infection. Vaccine development for Zika virus has been a high priority of the public health response, and several candidates have shown promise in pre-clinical and early phase clinical trials. The optimal selection and implementation of imperfect serologic assays are among the crucial issues that must be addressed in order to advance Zika vaccine development. Here, I review key considerations for how best to incorporate into Zika vaccine trials the existing serologic tools, as well as those on the horizon. Beyond that, this discussion is relevant to other intervention strategies to combat Zika and likely other emerging infectious diseases.

Indexed as

arbovirusclinical trialcross-reactivitydiagnosticsserologyvaccinevector-borne diseasevirusZika

Identifiers

PMID31010134
PMCPMC6632022
OpenAlexW2936812268

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.