ReviewNPJ vaccines2023
Availability and use of Standards in vaccine development.
Review in NPJ vaccines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of candidate reference materials for the harmonization of Lassa fever serology.Emerging microbes & infections · 2026Article
- Self-amplifying RNA (saRNA) and circular RNA (circRNA) vaccines: Progress, evidence gaps, and translational pathways for durable and scalable immunization.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Review
- Development and validation of a pseudotyped virus neutralization assay for quantification of anti-Lassa virus neutralizing antibodies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Article
- Predicting COVID-19 booster immunogenicity against future SARS-CoV-2 variants and the benefits of vaccine updates.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Quantitative assay to analyze neutralization and inhibition of authentic Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus.Medical microbiology and immunology · 2024Article
- Rapid diagnostic test: a critical need for outbreak preparedness and response for high priority pathogens.BMJ global health · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Reference materials are critical in assay development for calibrating and assessing their suitability. The devasting nature of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent proliferation of vaccine platforms and technologies has meant that there is even a greater need for standards for immunoassay development, which are critical to assess and compare vaccines' responses. Equally important are the standards needed to control the vaccine manufacturing processes. Standardized vaccine characterization assays throughout process development are essential for a successful Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls (CMC) strategy. In this perspective paper, we advocate for reference material incorporation into assays and their calibration to International Standards from preclinical vaccine development through control testing and provide insight into why this is necessary. We also provide information on the availability of WHO international antibody standards for CEPI-priority pathogens.
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.