ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2021
Exploring Risks of Human Challenge Trials For COVID-19.
Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- When Is Social Value Proportionate to Research Risks?Bioethics · 2026Article
- Article
- Exploring the ethics of tuberculosis human challenge models.Journal of medical ethics · 2026Article
- Article
- The Case for Human Challenge Trials in COVID-19.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2024Article
- A template for the authoring of statistical analysis plans.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2023Article
- SARS-CoV-2 entry into and evolution within a skilled nursing facility.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Ethical considerations of the vaccine development process and vaccination: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- COVID vaccine efficacy against the B.1.351 ("South African") variant-The urgent need to lay the groundwork for possible future challenge studies.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- Do coronavirus vaccine challenge trials have a distinctive generalisability problem?Journal of medical ethics · 2022Article
- A new day for human challenge trials?Trends in molecular medicine · 2022Article
- Testing fractional doses of COVID-19 vaccines.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- An ongoing science-society-ethics experiment: The human challenge trial debate in COVID-19 pandemic: The human challenge trial debate in COVID-19 pandemic.EMBO reports · 2022Article
- Global Systemic Risk and Resilience for Novel Coronavirus and COVID-19.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human challenge trials (HCTs) are a potential method to accelerate development of vaccines and therapeutics. However, HCTs for COVID-19 pose ethical and practical challenges, in part due to the unclear and developing risks. In this article , we introduce an interactive model for exploring some risks of a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-COV-2) dosing study, a prerequisite for any COVID-19 challenge trials. The risk estimates we use are based on a Bayesian evidence synthesis model which can incorporate new data on infection fatality risks (IFRs) to patients, and infer rates of hospitalization. The model estimates individual risk, which we then extrapolate to overall mortality and hospitalization risk in a dosing study. We provide a web tool to explore risk under different study designs. Based on the Bayesian model, IFR for someone between 20 and 30 years of age is 15.1 in 100,000, with a 95% uncertainty interval from 11.8 to 19.2, while risk of hospitalization is 130 per 100,000 (100-160). However, risk will be reduced in an HCT via screening for comorbidities, selecting lower-risk population, and providing treatment. Accounting for this with stronger assumptions, we project the fatality risk to be as low as 2.5 per 100,000 (1.6-3.9) and the hospitalization risk to be 22.0 per 100,000 (14.0-33.7). We therefore find a 50-person dosing trial has a 99.74% (99.8-99.9%) chance of no fatalities, and a 98.9% (98.3-99.3%) probability of no cases requiring hospitalization.
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.