Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38662331›Full record

ArticleInfectious diseases and therapy2024

Modelling COVID-19 Vaccination in the UK: Impact of the Autumn 2022 and Spring 2023 Booster Campaigns.

Diana Mendes, Sheeja Machira Krishnan, Esmé O'Brien, Thomas Padgett, Cale Harrison, W David Strain, Andrea Manca, Andrew Ustianowski, Rebecca Butfield, Elizabeth Hamson and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infectious diseases and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Diana MendesPfizer Ltd, Tadworth, UK. diana.mendes@pfizer.com.
Sheeja Machira KrishnanHealth Economics and Outcomes Research Ltd, Cardiff, UK.
Esmé O'BrienHealth Economics and Outcomes Research Ltd, Cardiff, UK.
Thomas PadgettHealth Economics and Outcomes Research Ltd, Cardiff, UK.
Cale HarrisonHealth Economics and Outcomes Research Ltd, Cardiff, UK.
W David StrainUniversity of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Andrea MancaSenior HTA Advisor, York, UK.
Andrew UstianowskiManchester University Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Rebecca ButfieldPfizer Ltd, Tadworth, UK.
Elizabeth HamsonPfizer Ltd, Tadworth, UK.
Charlie ReynardPfizer Ltd, Tadworth, UK.
Jingyan YangPfizer Inc, New York, USA.
Health Economics and Outcomes Research (United Kingdom) · GBPfizer (United Kingdom) · GBColumbia University · USManchester University NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe delivery of COVID-19 vaccines was successful in reducing hospitalizations and mortality. However, emergence of the Omicron variant resulted in increased virus transmissibility. Consequently, booster vaccination programs were initiated to decrease the risk of severe disease and death among vulnerable members of the population. This study aimed to estimate the effects of the booster program and alternative vaccination strategies on morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19 in the UK.

methodA Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Recovered (SEIR) model was used to assess the impact of several vaccination strategies on severe outcomes associated with COVID-19, including hospitalizations, mortality, National Health Service (NHS) capacity quantified by hospital general ward and intensive care unit (ICU) bed days, and patient productivity. The model accounted for age-, risk- and immunity-based stratification of the UK population. Outcomes were evaluated over a 48-week time horizon from September 2022 to August 2023 considering the actual UK autumn 2022/spring 2023 booster campaigns and six counterfactual strategies.

resultsThe model estimated that the autumn 2022/spring 2023 booster campaign resulted in a reduction of 18,921 hospitalizations and 1463 deaths, compared with a no booster scenario. Utilization of hospital bed days due to COVID-19 decreased after the autumn 2022/spring 2023 booster campaign. Expanding the booster eligibility criteria and improving uptake improved all outcomes, including averting twice as many ICU admissions, preventing more than 20% additional deaths, and a sevenfold reduction in long COVID, compared with the autumn 2022/spring 2023 booster campaign. The number of productive days lost was reduced by fivefold indicating that vaccinating a wider population has a beneficial impact on the morbidities associated with COVID-19.

conclusionOur modelling demonstrates that the autumn 2022/spring 2023 booster campaign reduced COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality. Booster campaigns with alternative eligibility criteria warrant consideration in the UK, given their potential to further reduce morbidity and mortality as future variants emerge.

Indexed as

Booster campaignComorbiditiesCOVID-19Healthcare resource useHospitalizationLong COVIDMortalityVaccination

Identifiers

PMID38662331
PMCPMC11098993
OpenAlexW4395463890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.