ReviewPharmacological reports : PR2022
To aspirate or not to aspirate? Considerations for the COVID-19 vaccines.
Review in Pharmacological reports : PR, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond correlation and causation: epistemic caution, anomalous findings, and COVID-19 vaccine safety.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2026Review
- The Possible Mechanistic Basis of Individual Susceptibility to Spike Protein Injury.Advances in virology · 2025Review
- Oral antiviral treatments for COVID-19: opportunities and challenges.Pharmacological reports : PR · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Syringe aspiration when vaccinating intramuscularly was not recommended before the pandemic due to the lack of conclusive evidence that it provides any benefit. However, in vivo evidence suggests that intravenous injection of mRNA vaccine can potentially lead to myocarditis, while introducing adenoviral vector to bloodstream can possibly result in thrombocytopenia and coagulopathy. These rare reactions were recorded in humans following the administration of the COVID-19 vaccines. Although the syringe aspiration may increase the level of pain at the injection site, it represents a simple technique to decrease the risk of vaccine introduction into the vascular system and potentially decrease the risk of severe reactions to mRNA and adenoviral vaccines. We are of the opinion that this cannot be disregarded if one considers that the COVID-19 vaccines will continue to be administrated globally in the form of initial and booster doses. Therefore, the aspiration when giving mRNA and adenoviral vaccines appears to be fully in line with the precautionary principle.
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.