ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2026
Comparative effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among health students, focusing on methodological concerns.
Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: With emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2, there is an increasing demand for comprehensive data on vaccine effectiveness disaggregated by vaccine type and/or country to frame future pandemic readiness plans. Design setting participants: We investigated comparative effectiveness (VE) of CoronaVac® and Comirnaty® vaccines among health students, considering potential risk factors. An open, prospective cohort study was conducted to follow participants with valid COVID-19 vaccinations, up to 2 years. Investigations included VE against symptomatic PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infections, along with vaccine-induced humoral immunity (including durability) and potential methodologic threats to conclusive decisions. Results: Symptomatic COVID-19 incidence rate was 4.24 (95% CI = 3.69-4.86) per 10,000 person-days among 1133 students (46.6% males) over 478,466 person-days. Taking a primary series/booster with CoronaVac as the reference, a primary series with Comirnaty or a Comirnaty booster protected students up to twenty times early in the pandemic, adjusting for covariates; significance disappeared in the Omicron period, though. Unexpected upsurges in virus-specific antibody levels, starting 3-6 months after the last vaccination when titers decreased to almost nill, suggested that disproportionality in vaccine durability could have led to a bias towards the null in VE estimates, due to mediator role of undetected breakthrough infections. Conclusion: Hybrid immunity may differentially deplete the susceptibles in either arm of the study, leading to bias in VE estimations. High infection rate in Omicron period might have augmented this bias, favoring the protective effect of the less potent vaccine. Periodic PCR testing as an integrated measure in future VE studies can avoid such bias.
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.