Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35099990›Full record

Observational studyAnnals of internal medicine2022

Effectiveness of Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccines Against Illness Caused by the B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant During an Outbreak in Guangdong, China : A Cohort Study.

Min Kang, Yao Yi, Yan Li, Limei Sun, Aiping Deng, Ting Hu, Jiayi Zhang, Jun Liu, Mingji Cheng, Shen Xie and 5 more

Open access · greenAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Annals of internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Min KangSchool of Public Health, Southern Medical University, and Guangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (M.K.).ORCID 0000-0001-7711-7600
Yao YiGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).ORCID 0000-0002-2116-4341
Yan LiGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Limei SunGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Aiping DengGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Ting HuGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Jiayi ZhangGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Jun LiuGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Mingji ChengGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Shen XieGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Min LuoGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Jing JiangGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Yawen JiangSchool of Public Health (Shenzhen), Sun Yat-sen University, Shenzhen, China (Y.J.).ORCID 0000-0002-0498-0662
Shixing TangSchool of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China (S.T.).
Jianfeng HeGuangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China (Y.Y., Y.L., L.S., A.D., T.H., J.Z., J.L., M.C., S.X., M.L., J.J., J.H.).
Guangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention · CNSouthern Medical University · CNSun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReal-world evidence on inactivated COVID-19 vaccines against the highly transmissible B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant of SARS-CoV-2 is limited, leaving an important gap in the evidence base about inactivated COVID-19 vaccines for use by immunization programs.

objectiveTo estimate inactivated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against the B.1.617.2 variant.

designRetrospective cohort study.

settingThe study was based on the first outbreak of the B.1.617.2 variant in mainland China that was discovered and traced in Guangdong in May and June 2021.

participants10 805 adult case patients with laboratory-confirmed infection and close contacts. MEASUREMENTS: Participants were categorized as unvaccinated, partially vaccinated (1 dose), and fully vaccinated (2 doses). We estimated VE against the primary outcome of pneumonia and the secondary outcomes of infections, symptomatic infections, and severe or critical illness associated with the B.1.617.2 variant.

resultsResults are reported in the order of outcome severity. Of 10 805 participants, 1.3% contracted infections, 1.2% developed symptomatic infections, 1.1% had pneumonia, and 0.2% had severe or critical illness. The adjusted VEs of full vaccination were 51.8% (95% CI, 20.3% to 83.2%) against infection, 60.4% (CI, 31.8% to 88.9%) against symptomatic infection, and 78.4% (CI, 56.9% to 99.9%) against pneumonia. Also, full vaccination was 100% (CI, 98.4% to 100.0%) effective against severe or critical illness. By contrast, the adjusted VEs of partial vaccination against infection, symptomatic infection, and pneumonia were 10.7% (CI, -41.2% to 62.6%), 6.8% (CI, -47.4% to 61.0%), and 11.6% (CI, -42.6% to 65.8%), respectively. LIMITATION: Observational study with possible unmeasured confounders; insufficient data to do reliable subgroup analyses by age and vaccine brand.

conclusionFull vaccination with inactivated vaccines is effective against the B.1.617.2 variant. Effort should be made to ensure full vaccination of target populations. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Natural Science Foundation of China and Key-Area Research and Development Program of Guangdong Province.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesAdultCohort StudiesCritical IllnessHumansRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2Vaccines, InactivatedCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccines, Inactivated

Identifiers

PMID35099990
PMCPMC8819853
OpenAlexW4210355570

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.