Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36195806›Full record

ArticleThe AAPS journal2022

Does an Intradermal Vaccination for Monkeypox Make Sense?

Randall J Mrsny

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The AAPS journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 47% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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.

Randall J MrsnyDepartment of Life Sciences and Centre for Technology Innovation, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK. rjm37@bath.ac.uk.
University of Bath · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mankind has recently had to deal a series of virus-mediated pandemics, resulting in extensive morbidity and mortality rates that have severely strained healthcare systems. While dealing with viral infections as a healthcare concern is not new, our exceptionally mobile society has added to the critical challenge of limiting pathogen spread of a highly transmissible virus prior to the generation, testing, and distribution of safe and effective vaccines. The tremendous global effort put forth to address the recent pandemic induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection has highlighted many of the strengths and weaknesses of how vaccines are identified, tested, and used to provide protection. These uncertainties are exacerbated by the lack of clear and consistent messaging that can occur when the processes of research, development, and clinical testing that normally requires years of study and consideration are compressed into a few months. In this commentary, I will provide some background on the intramuscular (IM), subcutaneous (SC), and intradermal (ID) administration routes used for injectable vaccines and some information on potential immunological outcomes. With this background, I will address the recent FDA decision to allow an approved vaccine against monkeypox virus to be administered by ID, as well as its initial approval route via SC, injection as a dose-sparing strategy to maximize immunization numbers using current stockpiles.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mpox, MonkeypoxHumansInjections, IntramuscularSARS-CoV-2VaccinationFDA guidanceIntradermalMonkeypoxVaccination

Identifiers

PMID36195806
PMCPMC9531852
OpenAlexW4301186592

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.