Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35543726›Full record

ReviewInnere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany)2022

[Vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) : Efficacy comparison, safety aspects, and current challenges].

H P Lipp

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 59% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

H P LippUniversitätsapotheke, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Otfried-Müller-Straße 4, 72076, Tübingen, Deutschland. hans-peter.lipp@med.uni-tuebingen.de.
Universitätsklinikum Tübingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several RNA-, vector-, and protein-based coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently available in order to achieve high titers of neutralizing antibodies against the spike protein as well as strongly activated CD4+- and CD+ T‑cells. However, there are formulation-specific advantages and disadvantages with regard to physicochemical stability, spectrum of adverse effects, need for adjuvants or adaptability to potentially novel viral variants. Whereas children and pregnant women now have access to COVID-19 vaccines, it often remains difficult to achieve sufficient cellular and humoral immunity in heavily immunocompromised patients. As a consequence, innovative vaccines need to be developed for these patients. Undoubtedly, reports addressing, e.g. vaccine-associated myocarditis or thrombotic thrombocytopenia have led to uncertainties; however, vaccination remains the most important cornerstone in containing the pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesAntibodies, ViralChildFemaleHumansImmunocompromised HostMyocarditisPandemicsPregnancySpike Glycoprotein, CoronavirusThrombocytopeniaAntibodies, ViralCOVID-19 VaccinesSpike Glycoprotein, Coronavirusspike protein, SARS-CoV-2COVID-19 vaccines/adverse effectsImmunity, cellularImmunity, humoralImmunosuppressionmRNA vaccines

Identifiers

PMID35543726
PMCPMC9092324
OpenAlexW4280604226

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.