The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The myth of the medical breakthrough: Smallpox, vaccination, and Jenner reconsidered
Open accessAbstract
A discussion of the particulars leading to the eradication of smallpox is pertinent to both investigators and the public as the clamor for more "breakthroughs" intensifies. The rational allocation of biomedical research funds is increasingly threatened by disease-advocacy groups and congressional earmarking. An overly simplistic view of how advances truly occur promises only to stunt the growth of researchers and research areas not capable of immediate great breakthroughs. The authors review the contributions of Jenner and his countless predecessors to give a more accurate account of how "overnight medical breakthroughs" truly occur-through years of work conducted by many people, often across several continents. In the public eye, few achievements are regarded with such excitement and awe as the medical breakthrough. Developments such as the discovery of penicillin and the eradication of polio and smallpox have each become a great story built around a singular hero. Edward Jenner, for example, is credited with discovering a means of safely conferring immunity to smallpox. The success of vaccination and subsequent eradication of this disease elevated Jenner to a status in medical history that is rivaled by few. However, the story of the eradication of smallpox does not start or end with the work of Jenner. Men such as Benjamin Jesty and Reverend Cotton Mather as well as unnamed physicians from tenth century China to eighteenth century Turkey also made critical contributions to the crowning achievement. Inoculation to prevent smallpox was commonplace in Europe for generations prior to Jenner's work. Jenner himself was inoculated as a child. In fact, vaccination with cowpox matter was documented in England over 20 years prior to Jenner's work. The authors' review of primary and secondary sources indicates that although Jenner's contribution was significant, it was only one of many. It is extremely rare that a single individual or experiment generates a quantum leap in understanding; this "lone genius" paradigm is potentially injurious to the research process. Wildly unrealistic expectations can only yield unsuccessful scientific investigation, but small steps by investigators supported by an informed public can build toward a giant leap, as the story of smallpox eradication clearly demonstrates.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Edward Jenner and the History of Smallpox and Vaccination
Riedel, S. (2005) · Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings · doi:10.1080/08998280.2005.11928028 · Cited by 964
Monoclonal Antibodies: A Prospective and Retrospective View
Sivaccumar, J., Sandomenico, A., Vitagliano, L., & Ruvo, M. (2021) · Current Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.2174/0929867327666200219142231 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Gross, C. P., & Sepkowitz, K. A.
- Venue
- International Journal of Infectious Diseases
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1998-07
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 54-60
- ISSN
- 1201-9712 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1989656651
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The myth of the medical breakthrough: Smallpox, vaccination, and Jenner reconsidered. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1201-9712(98)90096-0
- The paper
- Gross, C. P., & Sepkowitz, K. A. (1998). The myth of the medical breakthrough: Smallpox, vaccination, and Jenner reconsidered. International Journal of Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1201-9712(98)90096-0
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.