ArticleVaccines2023
Adverse Effects of Pfizer (BioNTech), Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1 CoV-19), and Moderna COVID-19 Vaccines among the Adult Population in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Vaccines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and immunogenicity of rAd26 and rAd5 vector-based heterologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in healthy adolescents: an open-label, non-randomized, multicenter, phase 1/2, dose-escalation study.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Trial
- The strategies and advances of mRNA translation booster.Asian journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2025Review
- Self-Reporting of Post-Vaccination Symptoms in the COVID-19 Vaccination Process for Teachers in a North Region of Poland.Vaccines · 2025Article
- Self-Reported Adverse Events Following COVID-19 Vaccination Among Medical Sciences Students After a Symptomatology Training Program: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Reported side-effects following Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine in the north-west province, Iran: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2024Article
- COVID-19 and flu vaccination in Romania, post pandemic lessons in healthcare workers and general population.PloS one · 2024Observational
- COVID-19 retreats and world recovers: A silver lining in the dark cloud.Health care science · 2023Review
- Article
- Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak has caused massive damage to the global healthcare system and economy. To compete with the SARS-COV-2 pandemic, several vaccines have been proposed to immunize the population. The present study aimed to investigate the adverse effects following the three doses of COVID-19 vaccination, Pfizer (BioNTech), (Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1 CoV-19), and Moderna among the adult population in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia. In this study, the total number of participants were 426, among them 277 (65%) were females and 149 (35%) were males. An online survey using Google forms in the English language and translated into the Arabic language was used to record the information. The questionnaire was distributed to participants who received either Pfizer-BioNTech, Oxford-AstraZeneca or Moderna vaccines. The general characteristics of participants were obtained, alongside an evaluation of the vaccination's adverse effects. The results revealed that Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines caused significantly less adverse effects than Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1) and Moderna (
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.