Home › Research › Clinical trials
Two new combination pediatric vaccines advancing to use in infants
Eva M Riedmann. Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2012-08-01
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
Two new combination pediatric vaccines advancing to use in infants Oncolytic viruses successfully delivered intravenously Cuba eliminates hepatitis B among minors under 15 Alzheimer's vaccine trial a success Study: Shingles vaccine safe for patients on immune-suppressing drugs Therapeutic cancer vaccine against metastatic renal cell carcinoma enters Phase 3 Pfizer’s Men B vaccine shows promise in Phase 2 Biovest initiates formal regulatory approval process for BiovaxID in Europe
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Riedmann, E. M. (2012). Two new combination pediatric vaccines advancing to use in infants. Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics. https://doi.org/10.4161/hv.21700
Vancouver
Riedmann EM. Two new combination pediatric vaccines advancing to use in infants. Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics. 2012. doi:10.4161/hv.21700. PMID: 22914446.
BibTeX
@article{riedmann2012-22914446,
author = {Riedmann, Eva M},
title = {{Two new combination pediatric vaccines advancing to use in infants}},
journal = {Human vaccines \& immunotherapeutics},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.4161/hv.21700},
pmid = {22914446},
url = {https://doi.org/10.4161/hv.21700}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Two new combination pediatric vaccines advancing to use in infants Oncolytic viruses successfully delivered intravenously Cuba eliminates hepatitis B among minors under 15 Alzheimer's vaccine trial a success Study: Shingles vaccine safe for patients on immune-suppressing drugs Therapeutic cancer vaccine against metastatic renal cell carcinoma enters Phase 3 Pfizer’s Men B vaccine shows promise in Phase 2 Biovest initiates formal regulatory approval process for BiovaxID in Europe
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Registered clinical trials →
Study details
- Study designclinical trial
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 38/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | Design recorded as “clinical trial”, which our rubric does not rank (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2012 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22914446) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 21 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100. |
| Total | 38 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Clinical trials
Also tagged “aducanumab”
332 studies in the library carry the topic tag “aducanumab”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 332 tagged studies.