MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292877370 · doi:10.1002/hsr2.798

Repositioning potentials of smallpox vaccines and antiviral agents in monkeypox outbreak: A rapid review on comparative benefits and risks

2022· review· en· W4292877370 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Md. Rabiul Islam, Md. Jamal Hossain, Arpita Roy, A. H. M. Nazmul Hasan, Md. Ashrafur Rahman, Mohammad Shahriar, Mohiuddin Ahmed Bhuiyan

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Science Reports · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonkeypoxOrthopoxvirusVacciniaSmallpoxSmallpox vaccineVirologyPoxviridaeOutbreakVariola virusMedicineVaccinationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and aims There is a sought for vaccines and antiviral agents as countermeasures for the recent monkeypox outbreak. Here, we aimed to review and discuss the repurposing potentials of smallpox vaccines and drugs in monkeypox outbreaks based on their comparative benefits and risks. Therefore, we conducted this rapid review and discussed the repurposing potentials of smallpox vaccines and drugs in monkeypox infection. Methods Here, we searched Google Scholar and PubMed for relevant information and data. We found many articles that have suggested the use of smallpox vaccines and antiviral drugs in monkeypox outbreaks according to the study findings. We read the relevant articles to extract information. Results According to the available documents, we found two replication‐competent and one replication‐deficient vaccinia vaccines were effective against Orthopoxvirus . However, the healthcare authorities have authorized second‐generation live vaccina virus vaccines against Orthopoxvirus in many countries. Smallpox vaccine is almost 85% effective in preventing monkeypox infection as monkeypox virus, variola virus, and vaccinia virus are similar. The United States and Canada have approved a replication‐deficient third‐generation smallpox vaccine for the prevention of monkeypox infection. However, the widely used second‐generation smallpox vaccines contain a live virus and replicate it into the human cell. Therefore, there is a chance to cause virus‐induced complications among the vaccinated subjects. In those circumstances, the available Orthopoxvirus inhibitors might be a good choice for treating monkeypox infections as they showed similar efficacy in monkeypox infection in different animal model clinical trials. Also, the combined use of antiviral drugs and vaccinia immune globulin can enhance significant effectiveness in immunocompromised subjects. Conclusion Repurposing of these smallpox vaccines and antiviral agents might be weapons to fight monkeypox infection. Also, we recommend further investigations of smallpox vaccines and Orthopoxvirus inhibitors in a human model study to explore their exact role in human monkeypox infections.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0080.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.241
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations71
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Science ReportsSame topicPoxvirus research and outbreaksFrench-language works237,207