Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33127296›Full record

ReviewSeminars in immunology2020

Transforming vaccine development.

Steve Black, David E Bloom, David C Kaslow, Simone Pecetta, Rino Rappuoli

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in immunology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Implications for COVID-19 vaccine uptake: A systematic review.Journal of infection and public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. A gaps-and-needs analysis of vaccine R&D in Europe: Recommendations to improve the research infrastructure.Biologicals : journal of the International Association of Biological Standardization · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Innovations and development of Covid-19 vaccines: A patent review.Journal of infection and public health · 2022
    Review
  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

5 authors.

Steve BlackCincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, OH 45229, USA.
David E BloomHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston MA 02115, USA.
David C KaslowPATH, Seattle WA 98121, USA.
Simone PecettaGSK, 53100 Siena, Italy.
Rino RappuoliGSK, 53100 Siena, Italy; Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK. Electronic address: rino.r.rappuoli@gsk.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The urgency to develop vaccines against Covid-19 is putting pressure on the long and expensive development timelines that are normally required for development of lifesaving vaccines. There is a unique opportunity to take advantage of new technologies, the smart and flexible design of clinical trials, and evolving regulatory science to speed up vaccine development against Covid-19 and transform vaccine development altogether.

Indexed as

Drug ApprovalCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansMachine LearningPublic HealthSARS-CoV-2Systems BiologyVaccinologyCOVID-19 VaccinesAdjuvantsCOVID-19Human geneticsMachine learningPlatform technologiesReal world evidenceRegulatory convergenceSmart clinical trialsSystems biologyVaccineVaccine developmentVaccine discoveryVaccines safety

Identifiers

PMID33127296
PMCPMC7591868

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.