Back

A Comparative Analysis of Clinical Stage 3 COVID-19 Vaccines using Knowledge Representation

Burgos-Salcedo, J. D.

2021-03-09 public and global health
10.1101/2021.03.07.21253082 medRxiv
Show abstract

The emergence of a novel SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus at the end of 2019 and its accelerated spread worldwide to become a pandemic has had, from the medical biotechnology point of view, an unprecedented global response, to the point that there are currently 176 vaccine candidates in preclinical stage, 66 in clinical stage, of which 19 are in phase 3, and 5 of these are massively applied worldwide. The purpose of the present work is to elaborate a hierarchical landscape of the current status of phase 3 vaccines, taking into account their attributes of technological platform, safety and efficacy. The methodology used was that of conceptual knowledge representation, resulting in, firstly, an appropriate classification of stage 3 vaccines, The Conceptual Lattice for COVID-19 vaccines, constructed according to how they relate to each other with respect to the set of their attributes. Secondly, the approach used allows proposing rational strategies for the design of heterologous vaccination schemes, which are urgently needed to control the pandemic.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 6%
26.9%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Frontiers in Public Health
○ 148 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.0%
Similar papers in this journal
3
JMIRx Med
◐ 32 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.1%
Similar papers in this journal
4
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.1%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Vaccines
○ 198 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.1%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
6
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 33%
3.2%
7
Expert Systems with Applications
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.7%
8
Heliyon
○ 152 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
9
Life
○ 29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
10
Vaccine
○ 203 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
11
Biology
○ 45 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
12
Journal of Medical Internet Research
◐ 87 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
13
Pharmaceuticals
○ 34 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.4%
14
Cureus
○ 68 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
15
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
◐ 45 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
16
Epidemiology and Infection
◐ 89 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
17
Applied Sciences
○ 25 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
18
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
○ 20 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
19
Mathematical Biosciences
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
20
COVID
○ 14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
21
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
22
Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
23
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.9%
24
Computational Biology and Chemistry
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.9%
25
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
26
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
○ 92 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
27
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
○ 43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
28
Frontiers in Physiology
○ 106 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
29
Healthcare
○ 17 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.9%
30
Infectious Disease Modelling
○ 54 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.