ArticlePloS one2023
Analysis of COVID-19 vaccine adverse event using language model and unsupervised machine learning.
Article in PloS one, 2023. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A data-driven machine learning framework to predict side effects of AstraZeneca and sinopharm COVID-19 vaccines.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Characteristics of Oral Adverse Effects following COVID-19 Vaccination and Similarities with Oral Symptoms in COVID-19 Patients: Taste and Saliva Secretory Disorders.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAfter the COVID-19 pandemic, the world has made efforts to recover from the chaotic situation. Vaccination is a way to help control infectious diseases, and many people have been vaccinated against COVID-19 by this point. However, an extremely small number of those who received the vaccine have experienced diverse side effects. METHODS AND
findingsIn this study, we examined people who experienced adverse events with the COVID-19 vaccine by gender, age, vaccine manufacturer, and dose of vaccinations by using the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System datasets. Then we used a language model to vectorize symptom words and reduced their dimensionality. We also clustered symptoms by using unsupervised machine learning and analyzed the characteristics of each symptom cluster. Lastly, to discover any association rules among adverse events, we used a data mining approach. The frequency of adverse events was higher for women than men, for Moderna than for Pfizer or Janssen, and for the first dose than for the second dose. However, we found that characteristics of vaccine adverse events, including gender, vaccine manufacturer, age, and underlying diseases were different for each symptom cluster, and that fatal cases were significantly related to a particular cluster (associated with hypoxia). Also, as a result of the association analysis, the {chills ↔ pyrexia} and {vaccination site pruritus ↔ vaccination site erythema} rules had the highest support value of 0.087 and 0.046, respectively.
conclusionsWe aim to contribute accurate information on the adverse events of the COVID-19 vaccine to relieve public anxiety due to unconfirmed statements about 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.