ArticleJournal of medical virology2022
Evaluation of response to different COVID-19 vaccines in vaccinated healthcare workers in a single center in Iran.
Article in Journal of medical virology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Short-term side effects of COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers: a multicenter study in Iran.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Comparing clinical presentation, viremia, and immunological factors at various severity presentations in hospitalized children affected by COVID-19: A cross-sectional study.Health science reports · 2023Article
- Characteristics of headaches attributed to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and factors associated with its frequency and prolongation: a cross-sectional cohort study.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Evaluation of response to different COVID-19 vaccines in vaccinated healthcare workers in a single center in Iran.Journal of medical virology · 2022Article
- Immunogenicity and adverse events of the COVID-19 vaccines in healthy and individuals with autoimmune diseases in an Iranian population.International journal of immunopathology and pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and emergent administration of various vaccines worldwide, comprehensive studies on the different aspects of vaccines are in demand. This study evaluated antibody response after the second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine in the Children's Medical Center personnel. The blood samples of 174 healthcare workers were gathered at least 10 days after vaccination. The administered vaccines included Oxford/AstraZeneca, COVAXIN, Sinopharm, and Sputnik V. This study assessed all antibodies employing ELISA methods, including anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody by DiaZist and Pishtazteb kits, anti-SARS-CoV-2-nucleocapsid by Pishtazteb kit, and anti-SARS-CoV-2-Spike by Razi kit. The cutoff for the tests' results was calculated according to the instructions of each kit. Totally, 174 individuals with an average age of 40 ± 9 years participated in this study, the proportion of men was 31%, and the frequency of past COVID-19 infection was 66 (38%). Sixteen (9%) personnel received Oxford/AstraZeneca, 28 (16%) COVAXIN, 29 (17%) Sinopharm, and 101 (58%) Sputnik V. anti-SARS-CoV-2-nucleocapsid and anti-SARS-CoV-2-Spike were positive in 37 (21%), and 163 (94%) participants and their mean level were more in adenoviral-vectored vaccines (p value < 0.0001). Neutralizing antibody was positive in 74% using Pishtazteb kit while 87% using DiaZist kit. All antibodies' levels were significantly higher in those with a past COVID-19 infection (p value < 0.0001). In conclusion, Oxford/AstraZeneca and Sputnik V had a similar outcome of inducing high levels of anti-SARS-Cov-2-spike and neutralizing antibodies, which were more than Sinopharm and COVAXIN. The titers of Anti-SARS-CoV-2-nucleocapsid antibody were low in all of these four 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.