Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35213948›Full record

ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2021

Technical note: The calculated real world BNT162b2 vaccine efficacy was 88% when accounting for asymptomatic cases.

Richard Paul Junghans

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Richard Paul JunghansSchool of Medicine & IT Bio, LLC, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

COVID-19 trials have relied on symptomatic subjects for judging the effectiveness of vaccine candidates, whereas asy-mptomatic subjects have been suspected as the main driver of the pandemic. An assumption of the same impact on symptomatic and asymptomatic breakthrough infections is shown to be flawed, resulting in an overestimate of the vaccines' true effectiveness. Recent available data provide the first large-scale unbiased data on asymptomatic versus symptomatic infections postvaccination, providing a unique opportunity to reassess the true infection rates after vaccination. By this, the breakthrough of the BNT162b2 vaccine is seen to be 12% rather than 5% for a corrected overall efficiency (symptomatic + asymptomatic) of 88% with the original virus strain in a real-world setting.

Indexed as

BNT162 VaccineCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansSARS-CoV-2Vaccine EfficacyBNT162 VaccineCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID35213948
PMCPMC8903997

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.