ArticleVaccine2022
COVID-19 vaccine uptake, effectiveness, and waning in 82,959 health care workers: A national prospective cohort study in Wales.
Article in Vaccine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uptake of COVID-19 vaccinations amongst 3,433,483 children and young people: meta-analysis of UK prospective cohorts.Nature communications · 2024Pooled it
- Long-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against infections, hospitalisations, and mortality in adults: findings from a rapid living systematic evidence synthesis and meta-analysis up to December, 2022.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Vaccine efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 for Pfizer BioNTech, Moderna, and AstraZeneca vaccines: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Pooled it
- COVID-19 vaccine booster uptake among healthcare workers in Bangladesh: predictors, challenges, and lessons from a low-income setting.Tropical medicine and health · 2026Article
- Effective communication and public engagement strategies to counter misinformation about infectious diseases.Immunology and cell biology · 2026Review
- Article
- Healthcare workers safety: a cohort study using healthcare utilisation databases on vaccination and vaccine timeliness impact against SARS-CoV-2 infection.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Acceptance of the COVID-19 Vaccine Among Postpartum Women in Five Countries.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Article
- COVID-19 vaccine uptake among Ontario physicians: a descriptive population-based retrospective cohort study.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Adverse events after first and second doses of COVID-19 vaccination in England: a national vaccine surveillance platform self-controlled case series study.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2024Article
- Observational
- Using the COM-B framework to elucidate facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake in pregnant women: a qualitative study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Assessing the coverage and timeliness of coronavirus vaccination among people experiencing homelessness in Wales, UK: a population-level data-linkage study.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Durability of Vaccine-Induced and Natural Immunity Against COVID-19: A Narrative Review.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2023Review
- Mathematical Modeling of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Wave under Vaccination Effects.Computation (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Adverse events following first and second dose COVID-19 vaccination in England, October 2020 to September 2021: a national vaccine surveillance platform self-controlled case series study.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2023Article
- Observational
- The impact of dementia, frailty and care home characteristics on SARS-CoV-2 incidence in a national cohort of Welsh care home residents during a period of high community prevalence.Age and ageing · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhile population estimates suggest high vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection, the protection for health care workers, who are at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure, is less understood.
methodsWe conducted a national cohort study of health care workers in Wales (UK) from 7 December 2020 to 30 September 2021. We examined uptake of any COVID-19 vaccine, and the effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech) against polymerase chain reaction (PCR) confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We used linked and routinely collected national-scale data within the SAIL Databank. Data were available on 82,959 health care workers in Wales, with exposure extending to 26 weeks after second doses.
resultsOverall vaccine uptake was high (90%), with most health care workers receiving theBNT162b2 vaccine (79%). Vaccine uptake differed by age, staff role, socioeconomic status; those aged 50-59 and 60+ years old were 1.6 times more likely to get vaccinated than those aged 16-29. Medical and dental staff, and Allied Health Practitioners were 1.5 and 1.1 times more likely to get vaccinated, compared to nursing and midwifery staff. The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine was found to be strong and consistent across the characteristics considered; 52% three to six weeks after first dose, 86% from two weeks after second dose, though this declined to 53% from 22 weeks after the second dose.
conclusionsWith some variation in rate of uptake, those who were vaccinated had a reduced risk of PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to those unvaccinated. Second dose has provided stronger protection for longer than first dose but our study is consistent with waning from seven weeks onwards.
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.