Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40852523›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025

Comparison of the rates of emergent otologic adverse events following mRNA COVID-19 versus influenza vaccination: a matched cohort analysis.

Tina Munjal, Shelley Batts, Saurabh Gombar, Konstantina M Stankovic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Tina MunjalDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.
Shelley BattsDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.
Saurabh GombarDepartment of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.
Konstantina M StankovicDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Otologic adverse events (AEs) have been occasionally reported as sequalae of COVID-19 vaccination, although their incidence in comparison with that of preexisting vaccines with high uptake remains unclear. This study compared the rates of new-onset otologic AEs among matched adults receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccination versus influenza vaccination. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used electronic health records (EHR) data from Stanford Health Care to identify adults aged 50-89 years with no history of otologic disorders prior to first Pfizer/Moderna COVID-19 vaccine (December 2020-January 2022) or any pre-pandemic influenza vaccine (January 2016-December 2019). Patients were categorized by vaccination into FluVax or COVIDVax cohorts. A 90-day history pre-vaccination (baseline period) and ≥6 months follow-up post-vaccination were required. Event rates of new-onset hearing loss (HL), sudden HL, tinnitus, vertigo/dizziness, aural fullness, and otalgia in the 6 months post-vaccination were compared between groups after high-dimensional propensity score (hdPS) matching. A sensitivity analysis was conducted among patients with no COVID-19 infection at any time. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using logistic regression for the hdPS matched cohorts. Results: After hdPS matching, 20,325 patients were included into the FluVax and COVIDVax cohorts, respectively (mean age: 65.5 and 65.2 years; 53.1 and 53.8% females). The rates of otologic AEs in the 6 months post-vaccination were similarly low for the FluVax and COVIDVax cohorts: 1.16% vs. 1.16% for any HL, 0.01% vs. 0.02% for sudden HL, 0.41% vs. 0.47% for tinnitus, 1.96% vs. 1.59% for vertigo, 0.27% vs. 0.25% for otalgia, and 0.09% vs. 0.2% for aural fullness. COVIDVax patients had lower odds of vertigo [OR 95% CI: 0.81 (0.70, 0.94)] and higher odds of aural fullness [2.16 (1.25-3.72)] than the FluVax patients (both Conclusion: New-onset otologic AEs were rare among a large cohort of hdPS-matched patients who received mRNA COVID-19 or pre-pandemic flu vaccination at a single institution. Although aural fullness was statistically more common in the COVIDVax vs. FluVax cohort, regardless of COVID-19 infection status, it remained extremely rare (<0.22%) in any cohort. These results indicate a similar otologic safety profile of the two vaccines, although future research is recommended in larger EHR databases to corroborate the findings.

Indexed as

aural fullnessCOVID-19hearing lossinfluenzaotalgiatinnitusvaccinationvertigo

Identifiers

PMID40852523
PMCPMC12367506

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.