ArticleClinical and experimental vaccine research2021
Article in Clinical and experimental vaccine research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antiviral activity of natural and modified hydrocolloids: main sources, susceptible viruses, structure-activity relationship and mechanisms of action.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
- Interception of Epoxide ring to quorum sensing system in Enterococcus faecalis and Staphylococcus aureus.AMB Express · 2023Article
- Polysaccharides-Naturally Occurring Immune Modulators.Polymers · 2023Review
- Developments in Rabies Vaccines: The Path Traversed from Pasteur to the Modern Era of Immunization.Vaccines · 2023Review
- Hyaluronic acid association with bacterial, fungal and viral infections: Can hyaluronic acid be used as an antimicrobial polymer for biomedical and pharmaceutical applications?Bioactive materials · 2023Review
- Hyaluronic Acid: A Review of the Drug Delivery Capabilities of This Naturally Occurring Polysaccharide.Polymers · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOne of the essential goals regarding the successful control of rabies infection is the development of a safe, effective, and inexpensive vaccine. the current study aimed to evaluate the inactivation potential of β-propiolactone (βPL), binary ethyleneimine (BEI), and hydrogen peroxide (H MATERIALS AND
methodsEstimating the inactivation kinetics of βPL, BEI, and H
resultsResults demonstrated that both adjuvants could progressively enhance the release of anti-rabies total immunoglobulin G as well as the pro-inflammatory mediators (interferon-gamma and interleukin-5) relative to time. However, a higher immune response was developed in the case of HA adjuvanted rabies vaccine compared to PPD adjuvanted one. The harmful consequences of the tested adjuvants were considered via investigating the histopathological changes in the tissues of the immunized rats using hematoxylin and eosin stain. Lower adverse effects were observed post-vaccination with HA and PPD adjuvanted vaccines compared to that detected following administration of the currently used alum as standard adjuvant.
conclusionOur findings suggested that HA and PPD could serve as a promising platform for the development of newly adjuvanted rabies vaccines with elevated immune enhancing potentials and lower risk of health hazards.
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.