Bibliographic record
Abstract
The intradermal (ID) route of immunization has a fair claim to primacy since the smallpox vaccine was administered via the skin for almost 100 years before the next human vaccine was introduced. Despite this early success and long-standing immunological interest in this route, the large majority of current vaccines are administered either via the intramuscular or subcutaneous routes. The accessibility of the skin is obvious and the potential immunological advantages of ID immunization have been known for some time. Animal models of ID vaccination have generally yielded excellent results with a range of microbial antigens and several ID vaccines have been successfully introduced for human infections such as rabies and hepatitis B. The skin is the largest immune ‘organ’ of the human body and, unlike subcutaneous and muscle tissues, the skin has evolved specifically to limit the penetration of chemical and microorganisms. As a result, the skin is better prepared than most tissues to actively screen for invasive microbes and to mount appropriate innate and adaptive immune responses. The immunologic characteristics and capabilities of the skin have been the subject of considerable research for many years due to this unique ‘front line’ position. Until recently however, full exploitation of the potential of the ID route for vaccination has been hampered by the lack of simple, reliable and safe injection systems. Recent advances in delivery system technologies have sparked renewed interest in the ID route for both established and new vaccines. This presentation will provide an overview of the potential immunological and practical advantages of ID vaccination as well as a brief review of historical and recent ID vaccination techniques.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".