Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35381906›Full record

ReviewAAPS PharmSciTech2022

Microneedle-Based Vaccine Delivery: Review of an Emerging Technology.

Ihab Mansoor, Heba A Eassa, Kamilia H A Mohammed, Marwa A Abd El-Fattah, Marwa H Abdo, Eman Rashad, Hadeer A Eassa, Asmaa Saleh, Omnya M Amin, Mohamed Ismail Nounou and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in AAPS PharmSciTech, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. B-EPIC: A Transformer-Based Language Model for Decoding B Cell Immunodominance Patterns.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Ihab Mansoor *Medical Department, BioSynergia, London, UK.
Heba A Eassa *Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy & Physician Assistant Studies, University of Saint Joseph, Hartford, CT, 06103, USA. heassa@usj.edu.
Kamilia H A MohammedDepartment of Pharmaceutics and Pharmaceutical Technology, Faculty of Pharmacy (Girls), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Marwa A Abd El-FattahDepartment of Pharmaceutics and Pharmaceutical Technology, Faculty of Pharmacy (Girls), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Marwa H AbdoDepartment of Pharmaceutics and Pharmaceutical Technology, Faculty of Pharmacy (Girls), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Eman RashadEgyptian Drug Authority, Giza, Egypt.
Hadeer A EassaFaculty of Science (Girls), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Asmaa SalehDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Omnya M AminDepartment of Pharmaceutics and Pharmaceutical Technology, Faculty of Pharmacy (Girls), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Mohamed Ismail NounouDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy & Physician Assistant Studies, University of Saint Joseph, Hartford, CT, 06103, USA.
Ola GhoneimDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Administrative Sciences, College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Western New England University, Springfield, MA, 01119, USA.
Al-Azhar University · EGUniversity of Saint Joseph · USEgyptian Government · EGPrincess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University · SAWestern New England University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaccination has produced a great improvement to the global health by decreasing/eradicating many infectious diseases responsible for significant morbidity and mortality. Thanks to vaccines, many infections affecting childhood have been greatly decreased or even eradicated (smallpox, measles, and polio). That is why great efforts are made to achieve mass vaccination against COVID-19. However, developed vaccines face many challenges with regard to their safety and stability. Moreover, needle phobia could prevent a significant proportion of the population from receiving vaccines. In this context, microneedles (MNs) could potentially present a solution to address these challenges. MNs represent single dose administration systems that do not need reconstitution or cold-chain storage. Being self-administered, pain-free, and capable of producing superior immunogenicity makes them a more attractive alternative. This review explores microneedles' types, safety, and efficacy in vaccine delivery. Preclinical and clinical studies for microneedle-based vaccines are discussed and patent examples are included.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesAdministration, CutaneousChildDrug Delivery SystemsHumansNeedlesTechnologyVaccinationVaccinesMicroneedleNeedle phobiaTransdermalVaccine

Identifiers

PMID35381906
PMCPMC8982652
OpenAlexW4224438194

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.