Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36457326›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Seroepidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 on a partially vaccinated island in Brazil: Determinants of infection and vaccine response.

José Cerbino-Neto, Igor Tona Peres, Margareth Catoia Varela, Luciana Gomes Pedro Brandão, Juliana Arruda de Matos, Luiz Felipe Pinto, Marcellus Dias da Costa, Márcio Henrique de Oliveira Garcia, Daniel Soranz, Maria de Lourdes de Sousa Maia and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

17 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

José Cerbino-NetoMunicipal Health Department of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro City Government, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Igor Tona PeresDepartment of Industrial Engineering and Tecgraf Institute, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Margareth Catoia VarelaNational Institute of Infectious Disease Evandro Chagas, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Luciana Gomes Pedro BrandãoNational Institute of Infectious Disease Evandro Chagas, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Juliana Arruda de MatosNational Institute of Infectious Disease Evandro Chagas, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Luiz Felipe PintoSchool of Medicine, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Marcellus Dias da CostaNational Institute of Infectious Disease Evandro Chagas, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Márcio Henrique de Oliveira GarciaMunicipal Health Department of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro City Government, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Daniel SoranzMunicipal Health Department of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro City Government, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Maria de Lourdes de Sousa MaiaBiomanguinhos Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Marco Aurélio KriegerVice Presidency of Production and Innovation in Health (VPPIS), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Rivaldo Venâncio da CunhaCoordination of Health Surveillance and Reference Laboratories, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Luiz Antonio Bastos CamachoNational School of Public Health, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Otavio RanzaniBarcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
Silvio HamacherDepartment of Industrial Engineering and Tecgraf Institute, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Fernando Augusto BozzaNational Institute of Infectious Disease Evandro Chagas, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Gerson Oliveira PennaTropical Medicine Centre - University of Brasília and Fiocruz School of Government, Brasília, Brazil.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRD’Or Institute for Research and Education · BRPontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro · BRCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública · ESUniversidade de Brasília · BRUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A vaccination campaign targeted adults in response to the pandemic in the City of Rio de Janeiro. Objective: We aimed to evaluate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and identify factors associated with seropositivity on vaccinated and unvaccinated residents. Methods: We performed a seroepidemiologic survey in all residents of Paquetá Island, a neighborhood of Rio de Janeiro city, during the COVID-19 vaccine roll-out. Serological tests were performed from June 16 to June 19, 2021, and adjusted seropositivity rates were estimated by age and epidemiological variables. Logistic regression models were used to estimate adjusted ORs for risk factors to SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity in non-vaccinated individuals, and potential determinants of the magnitude of antibody responses in the seropositive population. Results: We included in the study 3,016 residents of Paquetá (83.5% of the island population). The crude seroprevalence of COVID-19 antibodies in our sample was 53.6% (95% CI = 51.0, 56.3). The risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity in non-vaccinated individuals were history of confirmed previous COVID-19 infection (OR = 4.74; 95% CI = 3.3, 7.0), being a household contact of a case (OR = 1.93; 95% CI = 1.5, 2.6) and in-person learning (OR = 2.01; 95% CI = 1.4, 3.0). Potential determinants of the magnitude of antibody responses among the seropositive were hybrid immunity, the type of vaccine received, and time since the last vaccine dose. Being vaccinated with Pfizer or AstraZeneca (Beta = 2.2; 95% CI = 1.8, 2.6) determined higher antibody titers than those observed with CoronaVac (Beta = 1.2; 95% CI = 0.9, 1.5). Conclusions: Our study highlights the impact of vaccination on COVID-19 collective immunity even in a highly affected population, showing the difference in antibody titers achieved with different vaccines and how they wane with time, reinforcing how these factors should be considered when estimating effectiveness of a vaccination program at any given time. We also found that hybrid immunity was superior to both infection-induced and vaccine-induced immunity alone, and online learning protected students from COVID-19 exposure.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesAdultBrazilCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansSARS-CoV-2Seroepidemiologic StudiesCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesantibody responseCOVID-19risk factorsseroepidemiologic studiesseropositivityvaccine

Identifiers

PMID36457326
PMCPMC9706255
OpenAlexW4309215554

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.