ReviewHeliyon2023
Immunogenicity and safety of adjuvant-associated COVID-19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The benefits and risks of adjuvant-associated COVID-19 vaccines (ACVs) are unclear. The study aimed to assess the immunogenicity and safety of ACVs compared with controls (placebo or the same vaccine without adjuvants [NACVs]). Methods: Randomized controlled trials sourced from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically reviewed. Evaluators extracted information independently. The evidence quality was assessed using random-effects models. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results: Of the 33 studies, 27 analyzed immunogenicity (n = 9069, ACVs group; n = 3757, control), and 26 analyzed safety (n = 58669, ACVs groups; n = 30733 control). Compared with controls, full vaccination with ACVs produced significant immune responses (relative risk [RR] of seroneutralization reaction, 12.3; 95 % confidence interval [95 % CI], 6.92-21.89; standardized mean deviation of geometric mean titer 3.96, 95 % CI, 3.35-4.58). Additionally, ACVs produced significant immunoreactivity compared with NACVs only ( Conclusions: The findings of this meta-analysis demonstrate that ACVs may have a superior effect and an acceptable safety in preventing COVID-19. Although these results suggest the potential of ACVs, further studies are required.
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.