Talk:Novavax COVID-19 vaccine
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Efficacy in South-Africa not equal to efficacy against Beta variant edit
Added template. At the time of the study, there was still some non-Beta variants in SA. Therefore efficacy in SA is not efficacy against BETA. Please read the articles in depth to see the differences. Even some scientist seems confused. If not corrected, will do it myself. Don't want to start an edit war.
--Tech-ScienceAddict (talk) 23:37, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Study seems to be against immunodeficient HIV patients and not the general population, so the results should not be taken at face value. No vaccine expected to have much over 50% efficacy in immunodeficient individuals. DustWolf (talk) 06:07, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Technology, use of lipid nanoparticle edit
The article reads "The spike proteins are harvested and assembled onto a synthetic lipid nanoparticle ..." and I want to make sure the way I read this is correct: the proteins are presented on the outside of the LNPs, so they do not have to enter any cells, unlike the LNPs with mRNA that have to enter cells. Is that correct?
The text would differ only in one letter, changing "onto" to "into" which could easily be a typo.
--94.216.247.167 (talk) 02:09, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Economics section removed? edit
I have been reading the vaccine pages regularly (I am not a Wikipedia editor - I made an account to leave this message), and am wondering why the Economics section of this page was removed (it appears to have been removed by someone as "not news")? It seems this information is important to providing sociopolitical and economic information about access to vaccines, which certainly holds long-term importance as we continue to understand the long-term efficacy (or lack thereof) from vaccine usage - or lack of access to it.
The other major vaccine pages all have the same Economics section removed from this page, so it almost feels like a bit of prejudice against this particular biomanufacturer, which seems odd. Again, I am not a regular Wikipedia editor - but as someone who reads the vaccine pages weekly, it feels as if it is missing critical information to understand the application and adoption of this vaccine. Just my two cents! Disco8Ball (talk) 14:32, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
EMA Approval of Nuvaxovid edit
Nuvaxovid XBB.1.5 is now authorised across the EU. The European Commission granted a marketing authorisation on 31 October 2023. Source: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-recommends-approval-adapted-nuvaxovid-covid-19-vaccine-targeting-omicron-xbb15 72.78.209.27 (talk) 16:32, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
estimate edit
- vaccine is generally considered effective if the estimate is ≥50% with a >30% lower limit of the 95% confidence interval.
Estimate of what exactly? —Tamfang (talk) 01:01, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Update edit
There should be some updates possible from https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/nuvaxovid and the references in NUVAXOVID: Periodic safety update report assessment 20th June 2022 to 19th December 2022 mentioned on pdf pages 129 to 135 (internal page numbers 97 to 103). There are a few obstacles: (1) the bibliographic details (such as journal, volume, page, DOI) are not given; (2) the 196-page report appears to be scanned, so not text searchable, so efficient searching would need running through an optical character recognition program; (3) whether the report itself counts as WP:MEDRS would have to be checked. Since most of the content of the report appears to be by Novavax itself, it doesn't seem to me that it's independent of the producer. A question on the WP:MEDRS talk page should be able to sort out whether it's acceptable. Finding the sources themselves would be better. Boud (talk) 17:39, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: PHMD 2040 Service - Learning Fall 2023 edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 31 May 2023 and 29 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CharlesG146 (article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by CharlesG146 (talk) 01:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)