Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34199111›Full record

ReviewViruses2021

The Route of Administration of Rabies Vaccines: Comparing the Data.

Deborah J Briggs, Susan M Moore

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Viruses, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Deborah J BriggsDepartment of Diagnostic Medicine/Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA.
Susan M MooreDepartment of Diagnostic Medicine/Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA.
Kansas State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell culture rabies vaccines were initially licensed in the 1980s and are essential in the prevention of human rabies. The first post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) vaccination regimen recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) was administered intramuscularly over a lengthy three-month period. In efforts to reduce the cost of PEP without impinging on safety, additional research on two strategies was encouraged by the WHO including the development of less expensive production methods for CCVs and the administration of reduced volumes of CCVs via the intradermal (ID) route. Numerous clinical trials have provided sufficient data to support a reduction in the number of doses, a shorter timeline required for PEP, and the approval of the intradermal route of administration for PEP and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PreP). However, the plethora of data that have been published since the development of CCVs can be overwhelming for public health officials wishing to review and make a decision as to the most appropriate PEP and PreP regimen for their region. In this review, we examine three critical benchmarks that can serve as guidance for health officials when reviewing data to implement new PEP and PreP regimens for their region including: evidence of immunogenicity after vaccination; proof of efficacy against development of disease; and confirmation that the regimen being considered elicits a rapid anamnestic response after booster vaccination.

Indexed as

Antibodies, ViralHumansImmunization ScheduleImmunization, SecondaryImmunogenicity, VaccineImmunologic MemoryInjections, IntradermalInjections, IntramuscularPost-Exposure ProphylaxisPre-Exposure ProphylaxisRabiesRabies VaccinesRabies virusVaccinationVaccine EfficacyAntibodies, ViralRabies Vaccinesanamnestic responseefficacyimmunogenicityPEPpost-exposure prophylaxispre-exposure vaccinationPrePrabies

Identifiers

PMID34199111
PMCPMC8310204
OpenAlexW3177090847

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.