ArticleIJID regions2026
Longitudinal study of the immunological response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in Instituto Português de Oncologia of Coimbra professionals.
Article in IJID regions, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Vaccination is crucial for preventing the spread of the new wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines were approved in Europe: Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 and Moderna mRNA1237. This longitudinal study evaluated the humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in a cohort of health care workers receiving two vaccine doses and a booster dose. Methods: Blood samples were collected before and after vaccination to understand the dynamics of immunoglobulin (Ig)G levels over a long period. Vaccine adverse reactions (VARs) were monitored through a questionnaire. Results: Seronegative and seropositive individuals presented a decline in IgG titters, with consistently higher titters in seropositive individuals. Vaccination may elicit a response similar in magnitude to natural infection because the IgG titters after the second dose in seronegative individuals were similar to the IgG titters after the first dose in seropositive individuals. When sex was analyzed individually, there was a greater peak in IgG titters in females. Volunteers who reported VARs to the first dose had higher IgG levels than did those who did not report VARs. Conclusion: Importantly, our cohort was composed mostly of females, included few seropositive individuals, and elderly people were not included. This study, which was conducted over approximately 600 days, presents real-world data on the immune response to COVID-19 vaccination from a large cohort of health care workers.
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.