Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32991241›Full record

ReviewHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2021

Subcutaneous vaccine administration - an outmoded practice.

Ian F Cook

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Ian F CookFaculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Subcutaneous vaccine (SC) administration is an outmoded practice which complicates vaccine administration recommendations. Local adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) are a recognized determinant of vaccine hesitancy/refusal which can lead to an increased prevalence of vaccine-preventable disease.This extensive narrative review provides high-grade evidence that intramuscular (IM) administration of all vaccine types [adjuvanted, live virus and non-adjuvanted (inactivated whole cell, split cell and subunit)] significantly reduces the likelihood of local adverse events. This, combined with moderate grade evidence that IM injection generates significantly greater immune response compared with SC injection, allows a strong recommendation to be made for the IM injection of all vaccines except BCG and Rotavirus.This will simplify vaccination practice, minimize the inadvertent misadministration of vaccines and potentially improve public trust in vaccination.

Indexed as

Influenza VaccinesVaccinesAdjuvants, ImmunologicAntibodies, ViralInjections, IntramuscularInjections, SubcutaneousVaccinationAdjuvants, ImmunologicAntibodies, ViralInfluenza VaccinesVaccinesimmunogenicityintramuscularLiterature reviewlocal reactogenicityoutmoded practicesubcutaneousvaccine administration

Identifiers

PMID32991241
PMCPMC8086591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.