A century of "Camel Research": a bibliometric analysis.

Introduction: Bibliometrics is a quantitative analytic strategy used to assess the unit of publications per each field of research. Bibliometric studies are commonly employed to examine the current research climate, potential developments, and development trends in certain domains. In this work, the major contributors to camel research throughout the past century are discussed, along with the funding sources, academic institutions, scientific disciplines, and countries that contributed to "Camel Research". Methods: The Web of Science (WOS) database was used to retrieve the publications based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) instructions. Results: There are 7,593 articles dedicated to camel research on the Web of Science (as of August 1st, 2022). Three stages were involved in the publication of a study on camels. At the beginning, from 1877 to 1965, there were fewer than ten new publications per year. The second stage comprised 100 publications per year (1968-2005). Since 2010, nearly 200 new papers have been published each year. King Saud and King Faisal universities contributed > (0.08) of the total publications. While more than 1,000 funding agents were retrieved, the Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) showed the greatest rate of funded projects (0.17). Camel research was included in 238 scientific disciplines. The top disciplines were Veterinary Sciences (0.39), Agriculture Dairy Animal Science (0.144), and Food Science Technology (0.087). Conclusion: There has been an increase in interest in camels in recent years, but the research trends in camel health and production need greater support.

A century of "anticoccidial drugs": bibliometric analysis.

Publications are an important measure of scientific and technological progress. The quantitative examination of the number of publications in a certain research topic is known as bibliometrics. Bibliographic studies are widely used to analyse the condition of research, future potential, and current growth patterns in a certain topic. It can serve as a basis for making decisions and implementing strategies to achieve long-term development goals. To our knowledge, no research has been conducted in these domains; so, this work aims to employ bibliometric analysis to provide comprehensive data on publications related to anticoccidial drugs. As a result, the current study uses bibliometric analysis to track the evolution of anticoccidial drugs and its consequences in the academic and public worlds via a survey of relevant scientific and popular publications. The Dimensions database was used to retrieve the bibliographical statistics, which were then cleaned and analyzed. The data was also loaded into the VOS viewer, which generated a network visualization of the authors with the most joint articles. The investigation discovered three stages of publications and citations since the first article on anticoccidial drugs in 1949. The first stage, which ran from 1920 to 1968, was characterized by a scarcity of research articles on anticoccidial drugs. From 1969 to 2000, the second stage was marked by a stable and marginally increased number of articles. The scientific field was characterized by an increasing trend in the number of publications and their citations from 2002 to 2021. The study gave a complete list of the top anticoccidial drugs funding agents, countries, research institutes, most cited publications, and important co-authorship and partnerships. The outcomes of the study will help veterinary practitioners and researchers understand the trends and best sources of knowledge in the field of anticoccidial medications.

Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1, MVA-MERS-S, and GLS-5300 DNA MERS-CoV vaccines.

BACKGROUND: The Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is a pathogen associated with an acute respiratory infection that has a high mortality rate in humans. It was first identified in June of 2012 in the Arabian Peninsula. The success of the COVID-19 vaccines has shown that it is possible to take advantage of medical and scientific advances to produce safe and effective vaccines for coronaviruses. This study aimed to examine the safety and immunogenicity of MERS-CoV vaccines. METHODS: The research method Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used as the guideline for this study. RevMan 5.4 software was used to perform a meta-analysis of the included studies. The safety was assessed by recording adverse events following vaccination, and the immunogenicity was assessed by using seroconversion. RESULTS: The study included five randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria after screening. The studies had 173 participants and were performed in four countries. The vaccines examined were the ChAdOx1 MERS vaccine, MVA-MERS-S vaccine, and GLS-5300 DNA MERS-CoV vaccine. The meta-analysis showed no significant differences in local adverse effects (all local adverse effects and pain) or systemic adverse effects (all systemic adverse effects, fatigue, and headache) among participants in groups receiving a high-dose vaccine or a low-dose vaccine. There were, however, higher levels of seroconversion in high-dose groups than in low-dose groups (OR 0.16 [CI 0.06, 0.42, p = 0.0002]). CONCLUSION: The findings showed that high doses of current MERS-CoV vaccine candidates conferred better immunogenicity than low doses and that there were no differences in the safety of the vaccines.

Efficacy of the modified vaccinia Ankara virus vaccine and the replication-competent vaccine ACAM2000 in monkeypox prevention.

BACKGROUND: Recently, there has been an uptick in reported cases of monkeypox (Mpox) in Africa and across the globe. This prompted us to investigate the efficacy of the two vaccines that can prevent Mpox, the modified vaccinia Ankara virus (MVA) vaccine and ACAM2000 vaccine. We analyzed them to determine their rates of humoral cell responses, adverse events, and rash reactions and used these factors as the primary indicators. METHODS: This study adapted primary data obtained from the Medline, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases. We included a total of eight studies, three of which explored the ACAM2000 vaccine and five of which explored the JYNNEOS MVA vaccine. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the rates of humoral responses after inoculation by the two vaccines. JYNNEOS MVA vaccine immunization resulted in a statistically significant increased humoral immune response with an effect size of 81.00 (42.80, 119.21) at a 95% CI and a rash reaction with an effect size of 96.50 (42.09, 235.09.21) at a 95% CI. ACAM2000 resulted in a lesser increase in neutralizing antibodies than JYNNEOS MVA vaccine. Similar findings were identified for the rates of adverse reactions, but the difference was not statistically significant. The differences in rash reaction rates in the two vaccination groups were also not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: ACAM2000 and JYNNEOS vaccines have proven to be efficient in preventing Mpox even though variations exist in their modes of action and associated significant effects. The nonreplicating nature of JYNNEOS prevents the occurrence of the adverse effects seen with other vaccines.

Cognitive- and memory-enhancing effects of Augmentin in Alzheimer's rats through regulation of gene expression and neuronal cell apoptosis.

Introduction: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common type of dementia among older persons. This study looked at how Augmentin affected behavior, gene expression, and apoptosis in rats in which AD had been induced by scopolamine. Methods: The rats were divided into five groups: control, sham, memantine, Augmentin, and pre-Augmentin (the last group received Augmentin before scopolamine administration and was treated with memantine). A Morris water maze was utilized to measure spatial memory in the animals, and real-time quantitative reverse transcription PCR (qRT-PCR) and flow cytometry were employed to analyze gene expression and neuronal cell apoptosis, respectively. Results: Memantine and Augmentin increased spatial memory in healthy rats. The use of scopolamine impaired spatial memory. Both Augmentin and memantine improved spatial memory in AD rats, particularly in the group that received memantine; however, the outcomes were more substantial when Augmentin was administered before scopolamine was given to induce AD. Furthermore, the expression of presenilin-2 (PSEN2) and inositol-trisphosphate 3-kinase B (ITPKB) increased, whereas the expression of DEAD-box helicase 5 (DDX5) fell in the AD-treated groups; however, the results were more substantial after combination therapy. According to flow cytometry studies, Augmentin pre-treatment reduced apoptosis in AD rats. Discussion: The results showed that administering Augmentin to AD rats before memantine improved their spatial memory, reduced neuronal cell death, upregulated protective genes, and suppressed genes involved in AD pathogenesis.