Cited by 44SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchHealth and Medical Research ImpactsLegal, Health, Environmental and COVID-19 Challenges

NIH funding for vaccine readiness before the COVID-19 pandemic

Open access
Kiszewski, Anthony E., Cleary, Ekaterina Galkina, Jackson, Matthew J., Ledley, Fred D.·2021·Vaccine

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Rapid development of vaccines for COVID-19 has relied on the application of existing vaccine technologies. This work examines the maturity of ten technologies employed in candidate vaccines (as of July 2020) and NIH funding for published research on these technologies from 2000-2019. These technologies vary from established platforms, which have been used successfully in approved products, to emerging technologies with no prior clinical validation. A robust body of published research on vaccine technologies was supported by 16,358 fiscal years of NIH funding totaling $17.2 billion from 2000-2019. During this period, NIH funding for published vaccine research against specific pandemic threats such as coronavirus, Zika, Ebola, and dengue was not sustained. NIH funding contributed substantially to the advance of technologies available for rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, suggesting the importance of sustained public sector funding for foundational technologies in the rapid response to emerging public health threats.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.03.022

Cites

56 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [15]Christensen C.M. The innovator's dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail 1997 Harvard Business School Press Boston, MA

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kiszewski, A. E., Cleary, E. G., Jackson, M. J., & Ledley, F. D.
Affiliations
Bentley University (US)
Corresponding author
Ledley, Fred D.
Venue
Vaccine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-04
Volume
39
Issue
17
Pages
2458-2466
ISSN
0264-410X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3134274379
Cited by
38
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10
FWCI
3.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Vaccine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Informationszentrum Lebenswissenschaften (ZB MED) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Bentley University
  • National Institutes of Health (COVID-19)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health and Medical Research Impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Legal, Health, Environmental and COVID-19 Challenges
Keywords
NIH funding, vaccine technology, COVID-19 vaccines, vaccine readiness, research funding, vaccine development, pandemic preparedness, emerging infectious diseases, Zika virus, Ebola virus, dengue virus, public sector financing, vaccine platforms
MeSH terms
Zika Virus Infection, Zika Virus, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 Vaccines, Humans, Vaccines, Pandemics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review