ArticleMaxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery2022
Vaccine-associated complications: a comparative multicenter evaluation among dental practitioners and dental students-which candidate vaccine is more safe in SARS COV II, Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca), BBV152 (Covaxin), or BBIBP-CorV(Sinopharm)?
Article in Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inactivated vaccine Covaxin/BBV152: A systematic review.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Reported side-effects following Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine in the north-west province, Iran: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2024Article
- Comparative immunogenicity and safety of Gam-COVID-Vac and Sinopharm BBIBP-CorV vaccines: results of a pilot clinical study.Heliyon · 2023Article
- A Comprehensive Review on Various Aspects of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Vaccines.International journal of preventive medicine · 2022Review
- Side Effects Comparison of Coronavirus Vaccines Among Healthcare Workers in Shoushtar, Iran.Clinical pathology (Thousand Oaks, Ventura County, Calif.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rapidly developed vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 carry a risk of provoking side effects. This study aimed to evaluate current vaccination non-serious/serious side effects.
methodsA multicenter electronic questionnaire via an online platform was conducted over a 1-week period among vaccinated dental staff and dental students inquiring whether they experienced vaccine-related side-effects after vaccine administration.
resultsA total of 1205 respondents with a mean age of 39 (SD: 12) were retained for the analyses. The following vaccines were reported; Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca), BBV152 (Covaxin), or BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm). The majority of respondents received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (51.1%) and Gam-COVID-Vac (37.6%). The symptoms most frequently reported after vaccination were fatigue (79%), local pain in the injection site (77.4%), malaise (73%), and body pain (71.1%). Enrollees reported more onset of reactions on 0-12 h (44.1%) and 12-24 h (29.0%) after vaccine administration (p value <0.001). In 75.7%, the side effects last for up to 3 days. Merely 5.5% of cases reported the presence of side effects after the first week. Individuals with a history of SARSCoV-2 and other infections (MERS, influenza, and EBV) were more likely to report a number of unserious systemic side effects.
conclusionThe commonly reported adverse events were in line with similar studies. We have concerns with the frequency of serious adverse effects. This work necessitates the need for further clinical assessments with larger sample sizes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.