Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37915583›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in immunology2023

Effectiveness of booster vaccination with inactivated COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 infection in Guangdong, China: a cohort study.

Xiaofeng He, Biao Zeng, Ye Wang, Yulian Pang, Meng Zhang, Ting Hu, Yuanhao Liang, Min Kang, Shixing Tang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Xiaofeng HeDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Biao ZengInstitute of Infectious Disease Control and Prevention, Guangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China.
Ye WangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Yulian PangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Meng ZhangInstitute of Infectious Disease Control and Prevention, Guangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China.
Ting HuInstitute of Infectious Disease Control and Prevention, Guangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China.
Yuanhao LiangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Min KangInstitute of Infectious Disease Control and Prevention, Guangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, China.
Shixing TangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Guangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention · CNSouthern Medical University · CNChangzhi Medical College · CNJinan University · CNNanfang Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines wanes over time and the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant led to the accelerated expansion of efforts for booster vaccination. However, the effect and contribution of booster vaccination with inactivated COVID-19 vaccines remain to be evaluated. We conducted a retrospective close contacts cohort study to analyze the epidemiological characteristics and Omicron infection risk, and to evaluate the effectiveness of booster vaccination with inactivated COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptomatic COVID-19, and COVID-19 pneumonia during the outbreaks of Omicron BA.2 infection from 1 February to 31 July 2022 in Guangdong, China. A total of 46,547 close contacts were identified while 6.3% contracted Omicron BA.2 infection, 1.8% were asymptomatic infection, 4.1% developed mild COVID-19, and 0.3% had COVID-19 pneumonia. We found that females and individuals aged 0-17 or ≥ 60 years old were more prone to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The vaccinated individuals showed lower infection risk when compared with the unvaccinated people. The effectiveness of booster vaccination with inactivated COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19 was 28.6% (95% CI: 11.6%, 35.0%) and 39.6% (95% CI: 30.0, 47.9) among adults aged ≥ 18 years old, respectively when compared with full vaccination. Booster vaccination provided a moderate level of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection (VE: 49.9%, 95% CI: 22.3%-67.7%) and symptomatic COVID-19 (VE: 62.6%, 95% CI: 36.2%-78.0%) among adults aged ≥ 60 years old. Moreover, the effectiveness of booster vaccination was 52.2% (95% CI: 21.3%, 70.9%) and 83.8% (95% CI: 28.1%, 96.3%) against COVID-19 pneumonia in adults aged ≥ 18 and ≥ 60 years old, respectively. The reduction of absolute risk rate of COVID-19 pneumonia in the booster vaccination group was 0·96% (95% CI: 0.33%, 1.11%), and the number needed to vaccinate to prevent one case of COVID-19 pneumonia was 104 (95% CI: 91, 303) in adults aged ≥ 60 years old. In summary, booster vaccination with inactivated COVID-19 vaccines provides a low level of protection against infection and symptomatic in adults of 18-59 years old, and a moderate level of protection in older adults of more than 60 years old, but a high level of protection against COVID-19 pneumonia in older adults.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesAdolescentAdultAgedChinaCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2Young AdultCOVID-19 Vaccinesbooster vaccinationCOVID-19inactivated vaccineOmicron variantvaccine effectiveness

Identifiers

PMID37915583
PMCPMC10616523
OpenAlexW4387704020

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.