Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33262068›Full record

ReviewSeminars in immunology2020

Human challenge trials in vaccine development.

Amrita Sekhar, Gagandeep Kang

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 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
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.

Amrita SekharDivision of Gastrointestinal Sciences, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Gagandeep KangDivision of Gastrointestinal Sciences, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India. Electronic address: gkang@cmcvellore.ac.in.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R005982/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increasing recent interest in human challenge studies or controlled human infection model studies for accelerating vaccine development has been driven by the recognition of the unique ability of these studies to contribute to the understanding of response to infection and the performance of vaccines. With streamlining of ethical processes, conduct and supervision and the availability of new investigative tools from immunophenotyping to glycobiology, the potential to derive valuable data to inform vaccine testing and development has never been greater. However, issues of availability and standardization of challenge strains, conduct of studies in disease endemic locations and the iteration between clinical and laboratory studies still need to be addressed to gain maximal value for vaccine development.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicHumansInfectionsResearchVaccinationVaccinesVaccinesControlled human infection modelsHuman challenge studiesHuman infection studiesVaccines

Identifiers

PMID33262068
PMCPMC7700100

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.