Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36481108›Full record

ArticleVaccine2023

Tree-based data mining for safety assessment of first COVID-19 booster doses in the Vaccine Safety Datalink.

W Katherine Yih, Matthew F Daley, Jonathan Duffy, Bruce Fireman, David McClure, Jennifer Nelson, Lei Qian, Ning Smith, Gabriela Vazquez-Benitez, Eric Weintraub and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

13 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

W Katherine YihHarvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute and Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Matthew F DaleyKaiser Permanente Colorado, Aurora, CO, United States.
Jonathan DuffyImmunization Safety Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Bruce FiremanKaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, United States.
David McClureMarshfield Clinic Research Institute, Marshfield, WI, United States.
Jennifer NelsonKaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Lei QianKaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States.
Ning SmithKaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, United States.
Gabriela Vazquez-BenitezHealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, MN, United States.
Eric WeintraubImmunization Safety Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Joshua T B WilliamsDenver Health, Denver, CO, United States.
Stanley XuKaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States.
Judith C MaroHarvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute and Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Kaiser Permanente · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USHarvard University · USDenver Health Medical Center · USHealthPartners · USMarshfield Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) has been performing safety surveillance for COVID-19 vaccines since their earliest authorization in the United States. Complementing its real-time surveillance for pre-specified health outcomes using pre-specified risk intervals, the VSD conducts tree-based data-mining to look for clustering of a broad range of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination. This study's objective was to use this untargeted, hypothesis-generating approach to assess the safety of first booster doses of Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), and Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S) COVID-19 vaccines.

methodsVSD enrollees receiving a first booster of COVID-19 vaccine through April 2, 2022 were followed for 56 days. Incident diagnoses in inpatient or emergency department settings were analyzed for clustering within both the hierarchical ICD-10-CM code structure and the follow-up period. The self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistic was used, conditioning on the total number of cases for each diagnosis. P-values were estimated by Monte Carlo simulation; p = 0.01 was pre-specified as the cut-off for statistical significance of clusters.

resultsMore than 2.4 and 1.8 million subjects received Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna boosters after an mRNA primary series, respectively. Clusters of urticaria/allergy/rash were found during Days 10-15 after the Moderna booster (p = 0.0001). Other outcomes that clustered after mRNA boosters, mostly with p = 0.0001, included unspecified adverse effects, common vaccine-associated reactions like fever and myalgia, and COVID-19. COVID-19 clusters were in Days 1-10 after booster receipt, before boosters would have become effective. There were no noteworthy clusters after boosters following primary Janssen vaccination.

conclusionsIn this untargeted data-mining study of COVID-19 booster vaccination, a cluster of delayed-onset urticaria/allergy/rash was detected after the Moderna booster, as has been reported after Moderna vaccination previously. Other clusters after mRNA boosters were of unspecified or common adverse effects and COVID-19, the latter evidently reflecting immunity to COVID-19 after 10 days.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesDermatitis, AtopicDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsExanthemaUrticariaAd26COVS1BNT162 VaccineData MiningHumansAd26COVS1BNT162 VaccineCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19Data-miningEpidemiologic research designVaccinationVaccines

Identifiers

PMID36481108
PMCPMC9684100
OpenAlexW4309891833

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.