Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34986076›Full record

ArticleExpert review of vaccines2022

Adverse events reported after administration of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines among hospital workers: a cross-sectional survey-based study in a Spanish hospital.

Marta M Valera-Rubio, María Isabel Mi Sierra-Torres, Raquel R Castillejo García, Jaime J Cordero-Ramos, María Reyes Mr López-Márquez, Óscar O Cruz-Salgado, Miguel Ángel Ma Calleja-Hernández

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Expert review of vaccines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marta M Valera-RubioPharmacy Service, Virgen Macarena University Hospital, Seville, Spain.
María Isabel Mi Sierra-TorresPharmacy Service, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Córdoba, Spain.
Raquel R Castillejo GarcíaPharmacy Service, Virgen Macarena University Hospital, Seville, Spain.
Jaime J Cordero-RamosPharmacy Service and Department of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Technology, Faculty of Pharmacy, Virgen Macarena University Hospital; Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-6223-3844
María Reyes Mr López-MárquezHead of Preventive Medicine and Public Health Service, Virgen Macarena University Hospital, Seville, Spain.
Óscar O Cruz-SalgadoVirgen Macarena University Hospital, Seville, Spain.
Miguel Ángel Ma Calleja-HernándezPharmacy Service, Virgen Macarena University Hospital, Seville, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8449-5490
Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena · ESHospital Universitario Reina Sofía · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic in March 2020. The first vaccine became available in December, with practically no post-marketing data.

methodsAn analytical cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted in a third-level hospital in Spain between March and April 2021 to describe the difference in adverse events with the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines. The participants were hospital workers who completed a survey voluntarily at least 14 days after the last vaccine. The STROBE checklist was followed.

resultsOne thousand two hundred and forty-nine respondents completed the survey; 48% (599) received mRNA-1273 and 52% (650) BNT162b2. Fourteen thousand four hundred and two adverse reactions were recorded, 6896 local (3939 with mRNA-1273 and 2957 with BNT162b2 (6.6 vs 4.4 reactions per patient)) and 7506 systemic (4460 with mRNA-1273 and 3046 with BNT162b2 (7.4 vs 4.7 per patient)). Local reactions were more frequent after the first dose, while systemic reactions were higher after the second, for both vaccines and in a higher percentage with mRNA-1273 compared to BNT162b2 (p-value<0.05).

conclusionsLicensed mRNA vaccines were highly safe when administered under post-marketing conditions among working-age adults. The main adverse events were mild, although they occurred in most patients, especially after the mRNA-1273 vaccine.

Indexed as

2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273COVID-19AdultBNT162 VaccineCOVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHospitalsHumansSARS-CoV-2Surveys and Questionnaires2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273BNT162 VaccineCOVID-19 Vaccinesadverse eventsBNT162b2COVID19mRNA-1273vaccine

Identifiers

PMID34986076
PMCPMC8787836
OpenAlexW4206318865

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.