ArticleNature communications2023
Bias assessment of a test-negative design study of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness used in national policymaking.
Article in Nature communications, 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.
- 2024-2025 COVID-19 Vaccine and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events Among US Veterans.JAMA internal medicine · 2026Article
- Improving Assessment of Vaccine Effectiveness by Coupling Test-negative Design Studies with Survival Models.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Improving Assessment of Vaccine Effectiveness by Coupling Test-Negative Design Studies with Survival Models.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Precautionary Health Behaviours as Potential Confounders in COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Studies.Vaccines · 2025Article
- Strengthening vaccine effectiveness research to rebuild public trust: A call for global participation.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of the BNT162b2 XBB.1.5-adapted vaccine against COVID-19 hospitalization related to the JN.1 variant in Europe: a test-negative case-control study using the id.DRIVE platform.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Bias and negative values of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness estimates from a test-negative design without controlling for prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Biases in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness studies using cohort design.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
National test-negative-case-control (TNCC) studies are used to monitor COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in the UK. A questionnaire was sent to participants from the first published TNCC COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness study conducted by the UK Health Security Agency, to assess for potential biases and changes in behaviour related to vaccination. The original study included symptomatic adults aged ≥70 years testing for COVID-19 between 08/12/2020 and 21/02/2021. A questionnaire was sent to cases and controls tested from 1-21 February 2021. In this study, 8648 individuals responded to the questionnaire (36.5% response). Using information from the questionnaire to produce a combined estimate that accounted for all potential biases decreased the original vaccine effectiveness estimate after two doses of BNT162b2 from 88% (95% CI: 79-94%) to 85% (95% CI: 68-94%). Self-reported behaviour demonstrated minimal evidence of riskier behaviour after vaccination. These findings offer reassurance to policy makers and clinicians making decisions based on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness TNCC studies.
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.