ReviewVaccines2022
Global Research Trend in Vaccine Design.
Review in Vaccines, 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.
- Advancing immunization research in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: Launch of the Regional Research Working Group.New microbes and new infections · 2026Article
- Scientometric Study of Mpox and Vaccine Research: Dynamics, Emerging Patterns, and Networking.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Global vaccine research and application hotspots and trends: a systematic bibliometric analysis based on SCIE highly cited papers.BMJ open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current study established a research mapping of the vaccine design using bibliometric indicators and network visualization. For an analysis of the result, the study retrieved a total of 5379 documents from Scopus from 1983 to 2021. The study used the VOS Viewer and the RStudio tools for data visualization. The findings revealed that there has been significant growth in literature on vaccine design in the last two decades; in the last ten years, the year with the most publications were 2020, with 477 publications, and the highest had a total of 14,145 citations. D.R. Burton was ranked as the most prolific author, with 86 publications and 18,449 total citations and was observed as the most frequently published author in the domain. The National Institute of Health (NIH) was the most productive organization in the domain, with 266 publications. The document entitled "Genome analysis of multiple pathogenic isolates of Streptococcus agalactiae" received a total of 1398 citations, and was the most cited document in the field of vaccine design. In network visualization, an analysis of the co-occurrence of keywords showed that "vaccine" and "vaccine design" occurred the most, which was 761 and 335 times, respectively. The study also observed that there were five clusters of author collaboration with a maximum of 18 authors and a minimum of two authors. The findings of the study will aid scholarly coalitions in the domains of medicine and health, information science and bibliometric professionals to carry out further research in the area of vaccine design.
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.