Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38250870›Full record

ReviewVaccines2024

Responses to Common Misconceptions Relating to COVID-19 Variant-Adapted mRNA Vaccines.

George Kassianos, Pauline MacDonald, Ivan Aloysius, Shanti Pather

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Vaccines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

George KassianosRoyal College of General Practitioners, London NW1 2FB, UK.
Pauline MacDonaldInfection Matters Ltd., London WC2H 9JQ, UK.
Ivan AloysiusRingmead Medical Group, Bracknell RG12 7WW, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1836-8551
Shanti PatherBioNTech, An der Goldgrube 12, 55131 Mainz, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the waning of immunity over time has necessitated the use of booster doses of original coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. This has also led to the development and implementation of variant-adapted messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines that include an Omicron sub-lineage component in addition to the antigen based on the wild-type virus spike protein. Subsequent emergence of the recombinant XBB sub-lineages triggered the development of monovalent XBB-based variant-adapted mRNA vaccines, which are available for vaccination campaigns in late 2023. Misconceptions about new variant-adapted vaccines may exacerbate vaccine fatigue and drive the lack of vaccine acceptance. This article aims to address common concerns about the development and use of COVID-19 variant-adapted mRNA vaccines that have emerged as SARS-CoV-2 has continued to evolve.

Indexed as

BNT162b2COVID-19mRNA vaccinesSARS-CoV-2SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variantvaccination hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID38250870
PMCPMC10819631

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.