Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37033199›Full record

ReviewMedicina clinica (English ed.)2023

Vaccines against monkeypox.

Jordi Reina, Carla Iglesias

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

Review in Medicina clinica (English ed.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jordi ReinaUnidad de Virología, Servicio de Microbiología, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Facultad de Medicina de la Universidat Illes Balears, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Carla IglesiasUnidad de Virología, Servicio de Microbiología, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Facultad de Medicina de la Universidat Illes Balears, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Hospital Universitario Son Espases · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The monkeypox virus is a virus that has 90% genomic homology with the human (smallpox), but it is naturally transmitted between different wild animal reservoirs and is considered a zoonosis. Throughout the 20th century, different vaccines based on the vaccinia poxvirus were developed and used for vaccination against smallpox. After the eradication of smallpox, these vaccines were no longer used. Current vaccines against monkeypox virus are classified by the WHO as replicative (ACAM2000), minimally replicative (LC16m8) and non-replicative (MVA-BN), the latter being the one currently used. The 2022 extra-African monkeypox virus epidemic has highlighted the lack of vaccines with proven efficacy and low reactogenicity. It is considered that the use of this vaccine in the current outbreak may play a role in the prevention or attenuation of the disease as pre-exposure prophylaxis in close contacts of confirmed cases.

Indexed as

Monkeypox virusVaccinationVaccines

Identifiers

PMID37033199
PMCPMC10037303
OpenAlexW4360876933

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.