SynthesisPloS one2022
Vaccines to prevent COVID-19: A living systematic review with Trial Sequential Analysis and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 8 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
57 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines During Pregnancy: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Drug safety · 2024Pooled it
- Major mistakes or errors in the use of trial sequential analysis in systematic reviews or meta-analyses - the METSA systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Pooled it
- Comparing the Efficacy and Adverse Events of Available COVID-19 Vaccines Through Randomized Controlled Trials: Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.Journal of research in health sciences · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety profile of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in patients with hematological malignancies: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Epidemiological and economic impact of pre-exposure prophylaxis with targeted immunotherapies for COVID-19 among immunosuppressed patients in Argentina.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- How to conduct an individual participant data meta-analysis in response to an emerging pathogen: Lessons learned from Zika and COVID-19.Research synthesis methods · 2026Review
- Economic Analyses of COVID-19 Interventions: A Narrative Review of Global Evidence.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Situation Analysis of Immune Response Status One Year After the Nationwide COVID-19 Vaccination in Cameroon: Role of Obesity and SARS-CoV-2 Infection.Health science reports · 2025Article
- What Lessons can Be Learned From the Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic?International journal of public health · 2025Review
- The Second Round of a Population-Based Seroprevalence Study of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies and COVID-19 Vaccination Assessment in the Republika Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2025Article
- Article
- A Response to: A Letter to the Editor Regarding 'Comparative Effectiveness of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccines Among Older Adults: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis Using the GRADE Framework'.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2024Article
- IgG antibody levels against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in mother-child dyads after COVID-19 vaccination.Infection · 2024Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccines Among Older Adults: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis Using the GRADE Framework.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2024Article
- Comparative efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in phase III trials: a network meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Review
- Influence of Seasonality and Public-Health Interventions on the COVID-19 Pandemic in Northern Europe.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCOVID-19 is rapidly spreading causing extensive burdens across the world. Effective vaccines to prevent COVID-19 are urgently needed. METHODS AND
findingsOur objective was to assess the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines through analyses of all currently available randomized clinical trials. We searched the databases CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and other sources from inception to June 17, 2021 for randomized clinical trials assessing vaccines for COVID-19. At least two independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We conducted meta-analyses, network meta-analyses, and Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA). Our primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, vaccine efficacy, and serious adverse events. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE. We identified 46 trials; 35 trials randomizing 219 864 participants could be included in our analyses. Our meta-analyses showed that mRNA vaccines (efficacy, 95% [95% confidence interval (CI), 92% to 97%]; 71 514 participants; 3 trials; moderate certainty); inactivated vaccines (efficacy, 61% [95% CI, 52% to 68%]; 48 029 participants; 3 trials; moderate certainty); protein subunit vaccines (efficacy, 77% [95% CI, -5% to 95%]; 17 737 participants; 2 trials; low certainty); and viral vector vaccines (efficacy 68% [95% CI, 61% to 74%]; 71 401 participants; 5 trials; low certainty) prevented COVID-19. Viral vector vaccines decreased mortality (risk ratio, 0.25 [95% CI 0.09 to 0.67]; 67 563 participants; 3 trials, low certainty), but comparable data on inactivated, mRNA, and protein subunit vaccines were imprecise. None of the vaccines showed evidence of a difference on serious adverse events, but observational evidence suggested rare serious adverse events. All the vaccines increased the risk of non-serious adverse events.
conclusionsThe evidence suggests that all the included vaccines are effective in preventing COVID-19. The mRNA vaccines seem most effective in preventing COVID-19, but viral vector vaccines seem most effective in reducing mortality. Further trials and longer follow-up are necessary to provide better insight into the safety profile of these vaccines.
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.