Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37827725›Full record

SynthesisBMJ global health2023

Immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of microarray patches for vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Matthew N Berger, Ellen S Mowbray, Marian W A Farag, Erin Mathieu, Cristyn Davies, Claire Thomas, Robert Booy, Angus H Forster, S Rachel Skinner

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Microneedles: Selected Applications for Pediatrics.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Matthew N BergerSpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia matthew.berger@health.nsw.gov.au.ORCID 0000-0002-3720-6681
Ellen S MowbraySpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7356-8615
Marian W A FaragHillarys Plaza Medical Centre, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6168-2998
Erin MathieuSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5209-7989
Cristyn DaviesSpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1506-3285
Claire ThomasCentre for Population Health, Western Sydney Local Health District, North Parramatta, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6699-5026
Robert BooySydney Infectious Diseases Institute, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1953-7452
Angus H ForsterVaxxas Pty Ltd, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5363-2015
S Rachel SkinnerSpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1970-9792
The University of Sydney · AUSydney Local Health District · AUVaxxas (Australia) · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMicroarray patches (MAPs) deliver vaccines to the epidermis and the upper dermis, where abundant immune cells reside. There are several potential benefits to using MAPs, including reduced sharps risk, thermostability, no need for reconstitution, tolerability and self-administration. We aimed to explore and evaluate the immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of MAPs for vaccination.

methodsWe searched CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Ovid Embase, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science from inception to January 2023. Eligibility criteria included all research studies in any language, which examined microarrays or microneedles intended or used for vaccination and explored immunogenicity, safety, usability or acceptability in their findings. Two reviewers conducted title and abstract screening, full-text reviewing and data extraction.

resultsTwenty-two studies were included (quantitative=15, qualitative=2 and mixed methods=5). The risk of bias was mostly low, with two studies at high risk of bias. Four clinical trials were included, three using influenza antigens and one with Japanese encephalitis delivered by MAP. A meta-analysis indicated similar or higher immunogenicity in influenza MAPs compared with needle and syringe (N&S) (standardised mean difference=10.80, 95% CI: 3.51 to 18.08, p<0.00001). There were no significant differences in immune cell function between MAPs and N&S. No serious adverse events were reported in MAPs. Erythema was more common after MAP application than N&S but was brief and well tolerated. Lower pain scores were usually reported after MAP application than N&S. Most studies found MAPs easy to use and highly acceptable among healthcare professionals, laypeople and parents.

conclusionMAPs for vaccination were safe and well tolerated and evoked similar or enhanced immunogenicity than N&S, but further research is needed. Vaccine uptake may be increased using MAPs due to less pain, enhanced thermostability, layperson and self-administration. MAPs could benefit at-risk groups and low and middle-income countries. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022323026.

Indexed as

Influenza, HumanVaccinesHumansPainVaccinationVaccinesimmunisationpublic healthsystematic reviewvaccines

Identifiers

PMID37827725
PMCPMC10583062
OpenAlexW4387581179

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.