ArticlePloS one2022
The effect of pandemic prevalence on the reported efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Mathematical modelling for vaccine efficacy trials during the future epidemics of emerging respiratory infections.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines reported in Phase 3 trials varies from ~45% to ~95%. This study tests the hypothesis that the observed variation in efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates can be explained by the prevalence of the COVID-19 pandemic at trial sites. To test the proposed hypothesis, we conducted a systematic search following PRISMA guidelines. Our search resulted in 8 vaccine candidates that had reported efficacy data from a total of 20 Phase 3 trials, representing a total of 221,968 subjects, 453 infections across the vaccinated groups and 1,554 infections across the placebo groups. We use meta-regression models to analyse the potential associations between prevalence of COVID-19 pandemic at trial sites and efficacy of the reported SARS-CoV2 vaccines. The overall estimate of the risk-ratio is 0.24 (95% CI, 0.17-0.34, p ≤ 0.01), with a high degree of heterogeneity (τ2 = 0.50, I2 = 88.73%). Our meta-regression analysis with pandemic prevalence as the predictor explains almost half the variance in risk ratios across trials (R2 = 49.06%, p ≤ 0.01). This study finds that efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines reported in Phase 3 trial declines as pandemic prevalence at trial sites increases. Trials conducted in locations with low pandemic prevalence reported higher efficacies as compared to trials conducted in high pandemic prevalence locations.
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.