Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33811817›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Infectious diseases2021

Prioritising COVID-19 vaccination in changing social and epidemiological landscapes: a mathematical modelling study.

Peter C Jentsch, Madhur Anand, Chris T Bauch

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 102 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
102citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

102 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Comparative evaluation of behavioral epidemic models using COVID-19 data.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Social dilemma of nonpharmaceutical interventions: Determinants of dynamic compliance and behavioral shifts.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

42 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Peter C JentschDepartment of Applied Mathematics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada; School of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
Madhur AnandSchool of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
Chris T BauchDepartment of Applied Mathematics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada. Electronic address: cbauch@uwaterloo.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, authorities must decide which groups to prioritise for vaccination in a shifting social-epidemiological landscape in which the success of large-scale non-pharmaceutical interventions requires broad social acceptance. We aimed to compare projected COVID-19 mortality under four different strategies for the prioritisation of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

methodsWe developed a coupled social-epidemiological model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in which social and epidemiological dynamics interact with one another. We modelled how population adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions responds to case incidence. In the model, schools and workplaces are also closed and reopened on the basis of reported cases. The model was parameterised with data on COVID-19 cases and mortality, SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence, population mobility, and demography from Ontario, Canada (population 14·5 million). Disease progression parameters came from the SARS-CoV-2 epidemiological literature. We assumed a vaccine with 75% efficacy against disease and transmissibility. We compared vaccinating those aged 60 years and older first (oldest-first strategy), vaccinating those younger than 20 years first (youngest-first strategy), vaccinating uniformly by age (uniform strategy), and a novel contact-based strategy. The latter three strategies interrupt transmission, whereas the first targets a vulnerable group to reduce disease. Vaccination rates ranged from 0·5% to 5% of the population per week, beginning on either Jan 1 or Sept 1, 2021.

findingsCase notifications, non-pharmaceutical intervention adherence, and lockdown undergo successive waves that interact with the timing of the vaccine programme to determine the relative effectiveness of the four strategies. Transmission-interrupting strategies become relatively more effective with time as herd immunity builds. The model predicts that, in the absence of vaccination, 72 000 deaths (95% credible interval 40 000-122 000) would occur in Ontario from Jan 1, 2021, to March 14, 2025, and at a vaccination rate of 1·5% of the population per week, the oldest-first strategy would reduce COVID-19 mortality by 90·8% on average (followed by 89·5% in the uniform, 88·9% in the contact-based, and 88·2% in the youngest-first strategies). 60 000 deaths (31 000-108 000) would occur from Sept 1, 2021, to March 14, 2025, in the absence of vaccination, and the contact-based strategy would reduce COVID-19 mortality by 92·6% on average (followed by 92·1% in the uniform, 91·0% in the oldest-first, and 88·3% in the youngest-first strategies) at a vaccination rate of 1·5% of the population per week.

interpretationThe most effective vaccination strategy for reducing mortality due to COVID-19 depends on the time course of the pandemic in the population. For later vaccination start dates, use of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to interrupt transmission might prevent more deaths than prioritising vulnerable age groups.

fundingOntario Ministry of Colleges and Universities.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansMiddle AgedModels, TheoreticalSARS-CoV-2VaccinationYoung AdultCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID33811817
PMCPMC8012029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.