Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38021606›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

Post-COVID-19 Vaccination Infection Among Adults in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Rehab A Mohammed, Omar Baqais, Samaher G Basalib, Abdulaziz A Owaidah, Abdulrahman Mirza, Randa M Alharizi, Intessar Sultan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Rehab A MohammedDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine for Girls, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, EGY.
Omar BaqaisDepartment of Medicine, Ibn Sina National College for Medical Studies, Jeddah, SAU.
Samaher G BasalibDepartment of Medicine, Ibn Sina National College for Medical Studies, Jeddah, SAU.
Abdulaziz A OwaidahDepartment of Medicine, Ibn Sina National College for Medical Studies, Jeddah, SAU.
Abdulrahman MirzaDepartment of Medicine, Ibn Sina National College for Medical Studies, Jeddah, SAU.
Randa M AlhariziDepartment of Medicine, Ibn Sina National College for Medical Studies, Jeddah, SAU.
Intessar SultanDepartment of Medicine, Ibn Sina National College for Medical Studies, Jeddah, SAU.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile vaccines were one of the most effective tools to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, breakthrough infections have been reported. AIM OF THE WORK: We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines in preventing breakthrough infection, as well as to determine the possible risk factors and outcomes of post-vaccination infection.

methodsThis is a cross-sectional study using self-reported data of adult Saudi residents, including Saudi and non-Saudi people who received at least two doses of either Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccines. Based on the presence of COVID-19 symptoms that were confirmed by PCR, the participants were classified into three groups: (1) those with evidence of infection before vaccination, (2) those who had infection after vaccination, and (3) those who had infection before and after vaccination. For further evaluation, we compared the severity and outcomes in the participants who were infected before and after vaccination.

resultsThe study included 694 participants: 69.1% received three doses of the vaccine, and 71.1% of them were vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine. COVID-19 infection was reported in 48.3% of the total subjects, with a higher infection rate (17.8%) after vaccination compared to 12.5% before vaccination. Additionally, 18.32% of participants experienced infection both before and after vaccination. Out of the total 694 participants, 137 (19.7%) had breakthrough infections. Pfizer vaccine was more prevalent among the non-infected group (74.25% vs. 65.5%), while AstraZeneca vaccine was more prevalent among the infected group (6.4% vs. 5.9% (p<0.039). Diabetes was significantly higher among the infected group (16.9% vs. 8.1%, p=0.001, OR=2.29, 95% CI=1.42-3.68). Among those who were infected before and after vaccination, 71.9% reported less severe symptoms after vaccination.

conclusionBreakthrough infections may occur after vaccination; however, vaccines are overall effective in preventing severe symptoms. Pfizer vaccine appeared to be more effective in preventing COVID-19 infection. The presence of comorbidities, including diabetes, may increase the risk of infection.

Indexed as

astrazeneca vaccinebreakthrough infectioncovid-19pfizer vaccinevaccination

Identifiers

PMID38021606
PMCPMC10665761

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.