ArticleVaccine2024
Repurposing rapid diagnostic tests to detect falsified vaccines in supply chains.
Article in Vaccine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ensuring vaccine cold chain integrity: A rapid and low-cost test for identifying heat-exposed sucrose-containing vaccines.International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2026Article
- Biochemical profiling provides a low-cost and globally accessible method to detect falsified vaccines and insulin.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Enhancing vaccine stability in transdermal microneedle platforms.Drug delivery and translational research · 2025Review
- Identifying falsified COVID-19 vaccines by analysing vaccine vial label and excipient profiles using MALDI-ToF mass spectrometry.NPJ vaccines · 2025Article
- Using matrix assisted laser desorption ionisation mass spectrometry combined with machine learning for vaccine authenticity screening.NPJ vaccines · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Substandard (including degraded) and falsified (SF) vaccines are a relatively neglected issue with serious global implications for public health. This has been highlighted during the rapid and widespread rollout of COVID-19 vaccines. There has been increasing interest in devices to screen for SF non-vaccine medicines including tablets and capsules to empower inspectors and standardise surveillance. However, there has been very limited published research focussed on repurposing or developing new devices for screening for SF vaccines. To our knowledge, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have not been used for this purpose but have important potential for detecting falsified vaccines. We performed a proof-in-principle study to investigate their diagnostic accuracy using a diverse range of RDT-vaccine/falsified vaccine surrogate pairs. In an initial assessment, we demonstrated the utility of four RDTs in detecting seven vaccines. Subsequently, the four RDTs were evaluated by three blinded assessors with seven vaccines and four falsified vaccines surrogates. The results provide preliminary data that RDTs could be used by multiple international organisations, national medicines regulators and vaccine manufacturers/distributors to screen for falsified vaccines in supply chains, aligned with the WHO global 'Prevent, Detect and Respond' strategy.
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.