Following this puts new work involving it at the top of your briefing, with a note saying why it is there. Links are taken from the source record, never inferred.
A rigorous cross-sectional survey with adequate sample size and stratified design that confirms known disparities in vaccine acceptance between rural and urban populations, with identified predictors of booster uptake.
A narrative review synthesizing communication principles and proposing a structured framework (RATIO) for clinician media engagement in pediatric allergy and immunology, intended to guide practice rather than report empirical outcomes.
Cross-sectional survey study identifying associations between demographic factors and misinformation susceptibility in nurses, but without effect sizes, confidence intervals, or statistical significance reporting; descriptive and exploratory in nature.
An expert position paper on the role of National Immunisation Technical Advisory Groups in translating clinical evidence into country-specific vaccine recommendations, emphasizing the legitimacy of contextual variation.
This is a single mixed-methods technical audit of LLM performance on a specific task (stance classification) with no clinical trial data, no patient outcomes, and no direct evidence of impact on clinical practice or public health decision-making.
This is a narrative literature review synthesizing evidence on next-generation vaccine platforms and mechanisms; it provides descriptive synthesis rather than original data or comparative effectiveness evidence.
Randomized controlled trial with pre-specified primary endpoints (antibody and T-cell responses) in a well-defined older adult population shows statistically significant morning vaccination advantage, though T-cell effect did not reach significance.
Cross-sectional survey showing differences in vaccine literacy between science and non-science majors, with no intervention or comparator group, limited by observational design and inability to establish causation or generalizability.