Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37211454›Full record

ArticleVaccine2023

Estimated vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron infections among health care workers and the general adult population in Norway, August 2021 - January 2022.

Petter Langlete, Martin Tesli, Lamprini Veneti, Jostein Starrfelt, Petter Elstrøm, Hinta Meijerink

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Petter LangleteDepartment of Infection Control and Preparedness, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: Petter.Langlete@fhi.no.
Martin TesliDepartment of Mental Disorders, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway; Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Lamprini VenetiDepartment of Infection Control and Preparedness, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Jostein StarrfeltDepartment of Infection Control and Preparedness, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Petter ElstrømDepartment of Infection Control and Preparedness, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway; Centre for Epidemic Intervention Research, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Hinta MeijerinkDepartment of Infection Control and Vaccines, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Norwegian Institute of Public Health · NOOslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care workers (HCW) have a higher exposure to SARS-CoV-2 virus than other professionals and to protect both HCW and patients, HCW have been prioritized for vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in many countries. Estimating the COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness among HCW is important to provide recommendations to protect risk groups.

methodsWe estimated vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infections using Cox proportional hazard models among HCW with comparisons in the general population, from 1 August 2021 to 28 January 2022. Vaccine status is specified as a time-varying covariate and all models incorporated explicit time and were adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities, county of residence, country of birth, and living conditions. Data from the adult Norwegian population (aged 18-67 years) and HCW workplace data (as registered 1 January 2021) were collated from the National Preparedness Register for COVID-19 (Beredt C19).

resultsVaccine effectiveness was higher for Delta than for the Omicron variant in HCW (71 % compared to 19 %) as well as in non-HCW (69 % compared to -32 %). For the Omicron variant a 3rd dose provides significantly better protection against infection than 2 doses in both HCW (33 %) and non-HCW (10 %). Further, HCW seem to have better vaccine effectiveness than non-HCW for the Omicron, but not for the Delta variant.

conclusionsVaccine effectiveness were comparable between HCW and non-HCW for the delta variant, but significantly higher in HCW than non-HCW for the omicron variant. Both HCW and non-HCW got increased protection from a third dose.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2AdultCOVID-19 VaccinesHealth PersonnelHumansNorwayVaccine EfficacyCOVID-19 VaccinesDeltaHealth personnelNorwayOmicronSARS-CoV-2Vaccine effectiveness

Identifiers

PMID37211454
PMCPMC10169571
OpenAlexW4377220620

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.