Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35607808›Full record

Observational studyEpidemiology and infection2022

Protective effect of a first SARS-CoV-2 infection from reinfection: a matched retrospective cohort study using PCR testing data in England.

Joanne Lacy, Anna Mensah, Ruth Simmons, Nick Andrews, M Ruby Siddiqui, Antoaneta Bukasa, Shennae O'Boyle, Helen Campbell, Kevin Brown

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Epidemiology and infection, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Incidence of and risk factors for suspected COVID-19 reinfection in Kyoto City: a population-based epidemiological study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Joanne LacyImmunisation and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2063-1443
Anna MensahImmunisation and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Ruth SimmonsImmunisation and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8156-0146
Nick AndrewsImmunisation and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
M Ruby SiddiquiImmunisation and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Antoaneta BukasaImmunisation and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Shennae O'BoyleImmunisation and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Helen CampbellImmunisation and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Kevin BrownImmunisation and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The duration of immunity after first severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the extent to which prior immunity prevents reinfection is uncertain and remains an important question within the context of new variants. This is a retrospective population-based matched observational study where we identified the first polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive of primary SARS-CoV-2 infection case tests between 1 March 2020 and 30 September 2020. Each case was matched by age, sex, upper tier local authority of residence and testing route to one individual testing negative in the same week (controls) by PCR. After a 90-day pre-follow-up period for cases and controls, any subsequent positive tests up to 31 December 2020 and deaths within 28 days of testing positive were identified, this encompassed an essentially vaccine-free period. We used a conditional logistic regression to analyse the results. There were 517 870 individuals in the matched cohort with 2815 reinfection cases and 12 098 first infections. The protective effect of a prior SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive episode was 78% (odds ratio (OR) 0.22, 0.21-0.23). Protection rose to 82% (OR 0.18, 0.17-0.19) after a sensitivity analysis excluded 933 individuals with a first test between March and May and a subsequent positive test between June and September 2020. Amongst individuals testing positive by PCR during follow-up, reinfection cases had 77% lower odds of symptoms at the second episode (adjusted OR 0.23, 0.20-0.26) and 45% lower odds of dying in the 28 days after reinfection (adjusted OR 0.55, 0.42-0.71). Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection offered protection against reinfection in this population. There was some evidence that reinfections increased with the alpha variant compared to the wild-type SARS-CoV-2 variant highlighting the importance of continued monitoring as new variants emerge.

Indexed as

COVID-19ReinfectionCohort StudiesHumansPolymerase Chain ReactionRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2COVID-19infectious disease epidemiology

Identifiers

PMID35607808
PMCPMC9171058

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.