@article{vonKriesWeissFalkenhorstetal.2011,
  author    = {von Kries, R{\"u}diger and Weiss, Susanne and Falkenhorst, Gerhard and Wirth, Stephan and Kaiser, Petra and Huppertz, Hans-Iko and Tenenbaum, Tobias and Schroten, Horst and Streng, Andrea and Liese, Johannes and Shai, Sonu and Niehues, Tim and Girschick, Hermann and Kuscher, Ellen and Sauerbrey, Axel and Peters, Jochen and Wirsing von Koenig, Carl Heinz and R{\"u}ckinger, Simon and Hampl, Walter and Michel, Detlef and Mertens, Thomas},
  title     = {Post-Pandemic Seroprevalence of Pandemic Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Infection (Swine Flu) among Children < 18 Years in Germany},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {9},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0023955},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-141698},
  pages     = {e23955},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {Background: We determined antibodies to the pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 virus in children to assess: the incidence of (H1N1) 2009 infections in the 2009/2010 season in Germany, the proportion of subclinical infections and to compare titers in vaccinated and infected children. Methodology/Principal Findings: Eight pediatric hospitals distributed over Germany prospectively provided sera from in-or outpatients aged 1 to 17 years from April 1(st) to July 31(st) 2010. Vaccination history, recall of infections and sociodemographic factors were ascertained. Antibody titers were measured with a sensitive and specific in-house hemagglutination inhibition test (HIT) and compared to age-matched sera collected during 6 months before the onset of the pandemic in Germany. We analyzed 1420 post-pandemic and 300 pre-pandemic sera. Among unvaccinated children aged 1-4 and 5-17 years the prevalence of HI titers (>= 1:10) was 27.1\% (95\% CI: 23.5-31.3) and 53.5\% (95\% CI: 50.9-56.2) compared to 1.7\% and 5.5\%, respectively, for pre-pandemic sera, accounting for a serologically determined incidence of influenza A (H1N1) 2009 during the season 2009/2010 of 25,4\% (95\% CI : 19.3-30.5) in children aged 1-4 years and 48.0\% (95\% CI: 42.6-52.0) in 5-17 year old children. Of children with HI titers >= 1: 10, 25.5\% (95\% CI: 22.5-28.8) reported no history of any infectious disease since June 2009. Among vaccinated children, 92\% (95\%-CI: 87.0-96.6) of the 5-17 year old but only 47.8\% (95\%-CI: 33.5-66.5) of the 1-4 year old children exhibited HI titers against influenza A virus (H1N1) 2009. Conclusion: Serologically determined incidence of influenza A (H1N1) 2009 infections in children indicates high infection rates with older children (5-17 years) infected twice as often as younger children. In about a quarter of the children with HI titers after the season 2009/2010 subclinical infections must be assumed. Low HI titers in young children after vaccination with the AS03(B)-adjuvanted split virion vaccine need further scrutiny.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FarmerStrzelczykFinisguerraetal.2021,
  author    = {Farmer, Adam D. and Strzelczyk, Adam and Finisguerra, Alessandra and Gourine, Alexander V. and Gharabaghi, Alireza and Hasan, Alkomiet and Burger, Andreas M. and Jaramillo, Andr{\´e}s M. and Mertens, Ann and Majid, Arshad and Verkuil, Bart and Badran, Bashar W. and Ventura-Bort, Carlos and Gaul, Charly and Beste, Christian and Warren, Christopher M. and Quintana, Daniel S. and H{\"a}mmerer, Dorothea and Freri, Elena and Frangos, Eleni and Tobaldini, Eleonora and Kaniusas, Eugenijus and Rosenow, Felix and Capone, Fioravante and Panetsos, Fivos and Ackland, Gareth L. and Kaithwas, Gaurav and O'Leary, Georgia H. and Genheimer, Hannah and Jacobs, Heidi I. L. and Van Diest, Ilse and Schoenen, Jean and Redgrave, Jessica and Fang, Jiliang and Deuchars, Jim and Sz{\´e}les, Jozsef C. and Thayer, Julian F. and More, Kaushik and Vonck, Kristl and Steenbergen, Laura and Vianna, Lauro C. and McTeague, Lisa M. and Ludwig, Mareike and Veldhuizen, Maria G. and De Couck, Marijke and Casazza, Marina and Keute, Marius and Bikson, Marom and Andreatta, Marta and D'Agostini, Martina and Weymar, Mathias and Betts, Matthew and Prigge, Matthias and Kaess, Michael and Roden, Michael and Thai, Michelle and Schuster, Nathaniel M. and Montano, Nicola and Hansen, Niels and Kroemer, Nils B. and Rong, Peijing and Fischer, Rico and Howland, Robert H. and Sclocco, Roberta and Sellaro, Roberta and Garcia, Ronald G. and Bauer, Sebastian and Gancheva, Sofiya and Stavrakis, Stavros and Kampusch, Stefan and Deuchars, Susan A. and Wehner, Sven and Laborde, Sylvain and Usichenko, Taras and Polak, Thomas and Zaehle, Tino and Borges, Uirassu and Teckentrup, Vanessa and Jandackova, Vera K. and Napadow, Vitaly and Koenig, Julian},
  title     = {International Consensus Based Review and Recommendations for Minimum Reporting Standards in Research on Transcutaneous Vagus Nerve Stimulation (Version 2020)},
  series = {Frontiers in Human Neuroscience},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Human Neuroscience},
  issn      = {1662-5161},
  doi       = {10.3389/fnhum.2020.568051},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-234346},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Given its non-invasive nature, there is increasing interest in the use of transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (tVNS) across basic, translational and clinical research. Contemporaneously, tVNS can be achieved by stimulating either the auricular branch or the cervical bundle of the vagus nerve, referred to as transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation(VNS) and transcutaneous cervical VNS, respectively. In order to advance the field in a systematic manner, studies using these technologies need to adequately report sufficient methodological detail to enable comparison of results between studies, replication of studies, as well as enhancing study participant safety. We systematically reviewed the existing tVNS literature to evaluate current reporting practices. Based on this review, and consensus among participating authors, we propose a set of minimal reporting items to guide future tVNS studies. The suggested items address specific technical aspects of the device and stimulation parameters. We also cover general recommendations including inclusion and exclusion criteria for participants, outcome parameters and the detailed reporting of side effects. Furthermore, we review strategies used to identify the optimal stimulation parameters for a given research setting and summarize ongoing developments in animal research with potential implications for the application of tVNS in humans. Finally, we discuss the potential of tVNS in future research as well as the associated challenges across several disciplines in research and clinical practice.},
  language  = {en}
}