ArticleBMJ open2023
COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness among healthcare workers: a hospital-based cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- COVID-19 vaccination and antibody response in healthcare workers: a longitudinal serological study following the 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination campaign.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Harmonization of IgG antibody values against the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in Healthcare Workers Before and After COVID-19 Vaccination: A Cohort Study in a Primary Care Unit of Brazil.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Primary series COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness among health care workers in the country of Georgia, March-December 2021.PloS one · 2024Article
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine effectiveness against hospitalizations in adults.Immunotherapy advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesHealthcare workers (HCWs) were the first to be prioritised for COVID-19 vaccination. This study aims to estimate the COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 symptomatic infection among HCWs in Portuguese hospitals.
designProspective cohort study. SETTING AND
participantsWe analysed data from HCWs (all professional categories) from three central hospitals: one in the Lisbon and Tagus Valley region and two in the central region of mainland Portugal, between December 2020 and March 2022. VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was estimated as one minus the confounder adjusted HRs by Cox models considering age group, sex, self-reported chronic disease and occupational exposure to patients diagnosed with COVID-19 as adjustment variables.
resultsDuring the 15 months of follow-up, the 3034 HCWs contributed a total of 3054 person-years at risk, and 581 SARS-CoV-2 events occurred. Most participants were already vaccinated with a booster dose (n=2653, 87%), some are vaccinated with only the primary scheme (n=369, 12.6%) and a few remained unvaccinated (n=12, 0.4%) at the end of the study period. VE against symptomatic infection was 63.6% (95% CI 22.6% to 82.9%) for HCWs vaccinated with two doses and 55.9% (95% CI -1.3% to 80.8%) for HCWs vaccinated with one booster dose. Point estimate VE was higher for individuals with two doses taken between 14 days and 98 days (VE=71.9%; 95% CI 32.3% to 88.3%).
conclusionThis cohort study found a high COVID-19 VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in Portuguese HCWs after vaccination with one booster dose, even after Omicron variant occurrence. The small sample size, the high vaccine coverage, the very low number of unvaccinated individuals and the few events observed during the study period contributed to the low precision of the estimates.
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.