SynthesisPloS one2025
A systematic review to identify research gaps in studies modeling MenB vaccinations against Neisseria infections.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. 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.
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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The genus Neisseria includes two major human pathogens: N. meningitidis causing bacterial meningitis/septicemia and N. gonorrhoeae causing gonorrhoea. Mathematical models have been used to simulate their transmission and control strategies, and the recent observation of a meningococcal B (MenB) vaccine being partially effective against gonorrhoea has led to an increased modeling interest. Here we conducted a systematic review of the literature, focusing on studies that model vaccination strategies with MenB vaccines against Neisseria incidence and antimicrobial resistance. Using journal, preprint, and grey literature repositories, we identified 52 studies that we reviewed for validity, model approaches and assumptions. Most studies showed a good quality of evidence, and the variety of approaches along with their different modeling angles, was assuring especially for gonorrhoea studies. We identified options for future research, including the combination of both meningococcal and gonococcal infections in studies to have better estimates for vaccine benefits, and the spill over of gonorrhoea infections from the heterosexual to the MSM community and vice versa. Cost-effectiveness studies looking at at-risk and the wider populations can then be used to inform vaccine policies on gonorrhoea, as they have for meningococcal disease.
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.