1,720,955 research outputs found
Profylaktisk vaccination mot mpox : Hur effektiva och säkra är de rekommenderade smittkoppsvaccinerna?
No full textIntroduction Monkeypox virus (MPXV) is a zoonotic double-stranded DNA virus that causes mpox. The first known case of mpox in humans was reported in 1970 in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The most common symptoms are high fever, headache, fatigue, and swollen lymph nodes, followed by skin rashes that progress to blisters, pustules, and crusts. During 2022–2023, a global outbreak of mpox occurred, highlighting the need for safe, effective, and accessible vaccines against the infection. Approvals for mpox vaccines have mainly been based on experiences from smallpox, animal studies, and real-world data on effectiveness. Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic (MVA-BN) and LC16m8 are third-generation smallpox vaccines based on weakened vaccinia virus. These vaccines are recommended for pre-exposure prophylaxis against mpox. Aim: The aim of this work was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the recommended smallpox vaccines against mpox. Method: This work was based on five scientific articles to address the research question: how effective and safe are the recommended smallpox vaccines against mpox? The articles were selected through a systematic literature review in the PubMed database. Results: The results from the selected studies show that both vaccines, MVA-BN and LC16m8, induce an immunological response against mpox. The seroconversion rate for full vaccination with MVA-BN was 89,2%, while for LC16m8, it was 72%. Both MVA-BN and LC16m8 vaccines provided protection against mpox and had good safety profiles. MVA-BN, especially with booster doses, was an effective and well-tolerated vaccine, while LC16m8 provided strong initial protection. However, it remains unclear what level of neutralizing antibodies is required for sufficient protection and how long the protection lasts, which requires further research to refine vaccination guidelines and monitoring, especially for at-risk populations.Introduktion Monkeypoxvirus (MPXV) är ett zoonotiskt dubbelsträngat DNA virus som orsakar mpox. Det första kända fallet av mpox hos människa rapporterades 1970 i Demokratiska republiken Kongo. De vanligaste symtomen är hög feber, huvudvärk, trötthet och svullna lymfkörtlar därefter uppstår hudutslag som utvecklas till blåsor som sedan går över i pustler och skorpor. Under 2022–2023 inträffade ett globalt utbrott av mpox vilket belyste behovet av säkra, effektiva och lättillgängliga vacciner mot infektionen. Godkännanden av mpoxvacciner har främst baserats på erfarenheter från smittkoppor, djurstudier och realvärldsdata om effektivitet. Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic (MVA-BN) samt LC16m8 är tredje generationens smittkoppsvacciner som är försvagade virus baserade på vaccinia-virus. Dessa vacciner rekommenderas profylaktiskt mot mpox. Syfte: Syftet med detta arbete var att utvärdera säkerheten och effektiviteten av de rekommenderade smittkoppsvaccinerna mot mpox. Metod Detta arbete grundades på fem vetenskapliga artiklar för att besvara frågeställningen; hur effektiva och säkra är de rekommenderade smittkoppsvaccinerna mot mpox? Artiklarna valdes genom en systematisk litteraturundersökning på databasen Pubmed. Resultat: Resultaten från de utvalda studierna visar att båda vaccinerna MVA-BN och LC16m8 framkallar ett immunologiskt svar mot mpox. Serokonversionsfrekvens för fullständig vaccination med MVA-BN var 89,2% medan den för LC16m8 var 72%. Både MVA-BN och LC16m8 visade sig ge skydd mot mpox och hade goda säkerhetsprofiler. MVA-BN, särskilt med påfyllnadsdoser, var ett effektivt och väl tolererat vaccin, medan LC16m8 gav ett starkt initialt skydd. Dock är det fortfarande oklart vilken nivå av neutraliserande antikroppar som behövs för tillräckligt skydd och hur länge skyddet varar, vilket kräver mer forskning. Ytterligare studier behövs för att förbättra vaccinationsrekommendationer och uppföljning, särskilt för utsatta grupper
Profylaktisk vaccination mot mpox : Hur effektiva och säkra är de rekommenderade smittkoppsvaccinerna?
No full textIntroduction Monkeypox virus (MPXV) is a zoonotic double-stranded DNA virus that causes mpox. The first known case of mpox in humans was reported in 1970 in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The most common symptoms are high fever, headache, fatigue, and swollen lymph nodes, followed by skin rashes that progress to blisters, pustules, and crusts. During 2022–2023, a global outbreak of mpox occurred, highlighting the need for safe, effective, and accessible vaccines against the infection. Approvals for mpox vaccines have mainly been based on experiences from smallpox, animal studies, and real-world data on effectiveness. Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic (MVA-BN) and LC16m8 are third-generation smallpox vaccines based on weakened vaccinia virus. These vaccines are recommended for pre-exposure prophylaxis against mpox. Aim: The aim of this work was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the recommended smallpox vaccines against mpox. Method: This work was based on five scientific articles to address the research question: how effective and safe are the recommended smallpox vaccines against mpox? The articles were selected through a systematic literature review in the PubMed database. Results: The results from the selected studies show that both vaccines, MVA-BN and LC16m8, induce an immunological response against mpox. The seroconversion rate for full vaccination with MVA-BN was 89,2%, while for LC16m8, it was 72%. Both MVA-BN and LC16m8 vaccines provided protection against mpox and had good safety profiles. MVA-BN, especially with booster doses, was an effective and well-tolerated vaccine, while LC16m8 provided strong initial protection. However, it remains unclear what level of neutralizing antibodies is required for sufficient protection and how long the protection lasts, which requires further research to refine vaccination guidelines and monitoring, especially for at-risk populations.Introduktion Monkeypoxvirus (MPXV) är ett zoonotiskt dubbelsträngat DNA virus som orsakar mpox. Det första kända fallet av mpox hos människa rapporterades 1970 i Demokratiska republiken Kongo. De vanligaste symtomen är hög feber, huvudvärk, trötthet och svullna lymfkörtlar därefter uppstår hudutslag som utvecklas till blåsor som sedan går över i pustler och skorpor. Under 2022–2023 inträffade ett globalt utbrott av mpox vilket belyste behovet av säkra, effektiva och lättillgängliga vacciner mot infektionen. Godkännanden av mpoxvacciner har främst baserats på erfarenheter från smittkoppor, djurstudier och realvärldsdata om effektivitet. Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic (MVA-BN) samt LC16m8 är tredje generationens smittkoppsvacciner som är försvagade virus baserade på vaccinia-virus. Dessa vacciner rekommenderas profylaktiskt mot mpox. Syfte: Syftet med detta arbete var att utvärdera säkerheten och effektiviteten av de rekommenderade smittkoppsvaccinerna mot mpox. Metod Detta arbete grundades på fem vetenskapliga artiklar för att besvara frågeställningen; hur effektiva och säkra är de rekommenderade smittkoppsvaccinerna mot mpox? Artiklarna valdes genom en systematisk litteraturundersökning på databasen Pubmed. Resultat: Resultaten från de utvalda studierna visar att båda vaccinerna MVA-BN och LC16m8 framkallar ett immunologiskt svar mot mpox. Serokonversionsfrekvens för fullständig vaccination med MVA-BN var 89,2% medan den för LC16m8 var 72%. Både MVA-BN och LC16m8 visade sig ge skydd mot mpox och hade goda säkerhetsprofiler. MVA-BN, särskilt med påfyllnadsdoser, var ett effektivt och väl tolererat vaccin, medan LC16m8 gav ett starkt initialt skydd. Dock är det fortfarande oklart vilken nivå av neutraliserande antikroppar som behövs för tillräckligt skydd och hur länge skyddet varar, vilket kräver mer forskning. Ytterligare studier behövs för att förbättra vaccinationsrekommendationer och uppföljning, särskilt för utsatta grupper
Profylaktisk vaccination mot mpox : Hur effektiva och säkra är de rekommenderade smittkoppsvaccinerna?
No full textIntroduction Monkeypox virus (MPXV) is a zoonotic double-stranded DNA virus that causes mpox. The first known case of mpox in humans was reported in 1970 in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The most common symptoms are high fever, headache, fatigue, and swollen lymph nodes, followed by skin rashes that progress to blisters, pustules, and crusts. During 2022–2023, a global outbreak of mpox occurred, highlighting the need for safe, effective, and accessible vaccines against the infection. Approvals for mpox vaccines have mainly been based on experiences from smallpox, animal studies, and real-world data on effectiveness. Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic (MVA-BN) and LC16m8 are third-generation smallpox vaccines based on weakened vaccinia virus. These vaccines are recommended for pre-exposure prophylaxis against mpox. Aim: The aim of this work was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the recommended smallpox vaccines against mpox. Method: This work was based on five scientific articles to address the research question: how effective and safe are the recommended smallpox vaccines against mpox? The articles were selected through a systematic literature review in the PubMed database. Results: The results from the selected studies show that both vaccines, MVA-BN and LC16m8, induce an immunological response against mpox. The seroconversion rate for full vaccination with MVA-BN was 89,2%, while for LC16m8, it was 72%. Both MVA-BN and LC16m8 vaccines provided protection against mpox and had good safety profiles. MVA-BN, especially with booster doses, was an effective and well-tolerated vaccine, while LC16m8 provided strong initial protection. However, it remains unclear what level of neutralizing antibodies is required for sufficient protection and how long the protection lasts, which requires further research to refine vaccination guidelines and monitoring, especially for at-risk populations.Introduktion Monkeypoxvirus (MPXV) är ett zoonotiskt dubbelsträngat DNA virus som orsakar mpox. Det första kända fallet av mpox hos människa rapporterades 1970 i Demokratiska republiken Kongo. De vanligaste symtomen är hög feber, huvudvärk, trötthet och svullna lymfkörtlar därefter uppstår hudutslag som utvecklas till blåsor som sedan går över i pustler och skorpor. Under 2022–2023 inträffade ett globalt utbrott av mpox vilket belyste behovet av säkra, effektiva och lättillgängliga vacciner mot infektionen. Godkännanden av mpoxvacciner har främst baserats på erfarenheter från smittkoppor, djurstudier och realvärldsdata om effektivitet. Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic (MVA-BN) samt LC16m8 är tredje generationens smittkoppsvacciner som är försvagade virus baserade på vaccinia-virus. Dessa vacciner rekommenderas profylaktiskt mot mpox. Syfte: Syftet med detta arbete var att utvärdera säkerheten och effektiviteten av de rekommenderade smittkoppsvaccinerna mot mpox. Metod Detta arbete grundades på fem vetenskapliga artiklar för att besvara frågeställningen; hur effektiva och säkra är de rekommenderade smittkoppsvaccinerna mot mpox? Artiklarna valdes genom en systematisk litteraturundersökning på databasen Pubmed. Resultat: Resultaten från de utvalda studierna visar att båda vaccinerna MVA-BN och LC16m8 framkallar ett immunologiskt svar mot mpox. Serokonversionsfrekvens för fullständig vaccination med MVA-BN var 89,2% medan den för LC16m8 var 72%. Både MVA-BN och LC16m8 visade sig ge skydd mot mpox och hade goda säkerhetsprofiler. MVA-BN, särskilt med påfyllnadsdoser, var ett effektivt och väl tolererat vaccin, medan LC16m8 gav ett starkt initialt skydd. Dock är det fortfarande oklart vilken nivå av neutraliserande antikroppar som behövs för tillräckligt skydd och hur länge skyddet varar, vilket kräver mer forskning. Ytterligare studier behövs för att förbättra vaccinationsrekommendationer och uppföljning, särskilt för utsatta grupper
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
- …
