Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38053809›Full record

ReviewAustralian prescriber2023

COVID-19 vaccines in 2023.

Ketaki Sharma, Jean Li-Kim-Moy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Australian prescriber, 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
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  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

2 authors.

Ketaki SharmaNational Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4875-1909
Jean Li-Kim-MoyNational Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1632-0431

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most Australian adults now have hybrid immunity to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, referring to a combination of protection from previous vaccine doses and past infection. Protection from both vaccination and past infection wanes over time. Booster doses are recommended to ensure that those who are at increased risk of severe COVID-19 remain protected. The optimal timing of future booster doses to maintain adequate protection against severe illness is not yet known. Older age remains the most important risk factor for severe COVID-19, including in the current Omicron variant era. The original COVID-19 vaccines are monovalent vaccines based on the ancestral strain of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Bivalent vaccines have been developed based on earlier Omicron subvariants (BA.1 or BA.4-5) and the ancestral strain. These provide enhanced protection against severe illness from Omicron compared with the original monovalent vaccines. Updated monovalent vaccines based on a more recent Omicron subvariant (XBB.1.5) have been developed. COVID-19 vaccines have an excellent safety record, and serious adverse events are extremely rare.

Indexed as

COVID-19immunisationModernaNovavaxPfizervaccinationvaccine safety

Identifiers

PMID38053809
PMCPMC10665092

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.