ArticleNature communications2025
Global disparities in the introduction, scale-up, and effectiveness evaluation of COVID-19 vaccines.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delivery Systems for Therapeutic Genome Editing: Challenges, Innovations, and Future Perspectives.MedComm · 2026Review
- Pharmaceutical design of mRNA vaccines for endemic infectious diseases: integrating antigen discovery with platform engineering.Clinical and experimental vaccine research · 2026Review
- The era of "Infectious Diseases+" has arrived: multi-disciplinary integration in pediatric infectious disease prevention and control.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The global response to COVID-19 saw the most rapid and extensive vaccination rollout in history. Yet there were large disparities in the introduction, scale-up, and evaluation of programmes. To systematically quantify these disparities, we generate linkages across public datasets containing country- and territory-level income data, COVID-19 vaccination rates, and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE). Our results show that, compared with high-income countries, lower-income countries introduced vaccines later, were less likely to achieve key coverage milestones, and were slower to do so where these milestones were achieved. The literature on primary series COVID-19 VE has been dominated by studies of mRNA vaccines from high-income countries, with data for other vaccines and lower-income countries appearing later and in substantially lower quantities. For vaccines with available VE data across multiple income settings (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and ChAdOx1-S), our meta-regression highlights robust protection against severe COVID-19, with no significant differences in primary series VE according to country-level income status during the Delta and Omicron periods. Our findings demonstrate the strong protection conferred by COVID-19 vaccines across diverse populations. Nonetheless, our results quantify the stark disparities that pervaded each stage of COVID-19 vaccine implementation, and highlight evidence gaps related to products and platforms being used across much of the globe.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.