ArticleVaccines2023
Effectiveness and Protection Duration of Anti-COVID-19 Vaccinations among Healthcare Personnel in Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Article in Vaccines, 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.
- Impact of Spa Therapy on Symptoms and Quality of Life in Post-COVID-19 Patients with Chronic Conditions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The anti-COVID-19 vaccines, developed for use during the pandemic period, must be evaluated for effectiveness in order to coordinate the vaccination program. Therefore, this study aimed to measure the anti-COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) and duration of protection against symptomatic forms of infection among healthcare personnel who were professionally exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. A prospective cohort study, which was conducted in a university hospital between January 2021 and April 2022, compared immunologically naïve and previously infected personnel who were vaccinated, revaccinated, or unvaccinated. The VE was measured based on survival rates constructed with the actuarial method, using 30 day intervals. Among the 783 subjects that were included in the study, those that were vaccinated showed a decrease in VE from 90.98% (95% confidence intervals (CI): 74.87-96.77) in the first 30 days to 69.95% (95% CI: 40.29-84.87) at 60 days after vaccination. The VE for revaccinated personnel was 93.27% (95% CI: 77.53-97.99) at 60 days and 86.54% (95% CI: 75.59-92.58) at 90 days after revaccination. For previously infected personnel, protection against reinfection was 94.03% (95% CI: 79.41-98.27) at 420 days and 82.08% (95% CI: 53.93-93.03) at 450 days after revaccination. The highest VE for preventing the symptomatic forms of COVID-19 was observed in the revaccinated, but only for a 3-month duration. Better protection against reinfection was provided by revaccination after passing through infection.
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.