SynthesisLancet (London, England)2022
Duration of effectiveness of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease: results of a systematic review and meta-regression.
Synthesis in Lancet (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 803 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
803 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,182 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Emerging Viral Zoonotic Diseases, 2016-2026.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2026Pooled it
- The efficacy and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Low Dose Radiation Therapy for COVID-19 Pneumonia: Learnings of 4 Years Since Pandemic.Clinical and translational science · 2025Pooled it
- Comprehensive PRISMA Based Systematic Review: Exploring the Phytochemistry, Pharmacological Profile and Clinical aspects ofCurrent topics in medicinal chemistry · 2025Pooled it
- Safety, immunogenicity, and long COVID outcomes following inactivated COVID-19 vaccine boosters in elderly Chinese: a prospective cohort study.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Trial
- Ensitrelvir for the Treatment of Nonhospitalized Adults with COVID-19: Results from the SCORPIO-HR, Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Impact of an aerosolized or intramuscular adenovirus type 5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine on Fc-mediated immune effector functions in a hybrid immunity population.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Trial
- No immunological interference or concerns about safety when seasonal quadrivalent influenza vaccine is co-administered with a COVID-19 mRNA-1273 booster vaccine in adults: A randomized trial.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Trial
- The safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of heterologous boosting with a SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine (SYS6006) in Chinese participants aged 18 years or more: a randomized, open-label, active-controlled phase 3 trial.Emerging microbes & infections · 2024Trial
- Effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) original vaccines to prevent COVID-19-related hospitalisations among Alaska Native peoples, January 2021-October 2022.International journal of circumpolar health · 2026Article
- Waning immunity and the future of booster vaccination strategies in global vaccine programs post COVID-19.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Review
- Postpandemic COVID-19 Vaccination Willingness Among Physicians and Medical Trainees in China: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2026Article
- Increased In-Hospital Mortality in Immunocompromised Individuals Hospitalized With COVID-19 During the Global Pandemic: A Multinational Cohort Study in the EuCARE Project.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Article
- No clear evidence of PFAS-induced immunomodulation in SARS-CoV-2-specific human T cell responses following vaccination.Archives of toxicology · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness across epidemiologic designs: test-negative case-control versus retrospective cohort analyses in a nationwide study.International journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Pulmonary Delivery of Self-Amplifying RNA: Balancing Inflammation and Durable Transgene Expression.ACS nano · 2026Article
- Temporal Association Between COVID-19 Vaccination and HBsAg Loss in Chronic Hepatitis B Infection: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2026Article
743 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundKnowing whether COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness wanes is crucial for informing vaccine policy, such as the need for and timing of booster doses. We aimed to systematically review the evidence for the duration of protection of COVID-19 vaccines against various clinical outcomes, and to assess changes in the rates of breakthrough infection caused by the delta variant with increasing time since vaccination.
methodsThis study was designed as a systematic review and meta-regression. We did a systematic review of preprint and peer-reviewed published article databases from June 17, 2021, to Dec 2, 2021. Randomised controlled trials of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and observational studies of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness were eligible. Studies with vaccine efficacy or effectiveness estimates at discrete time intervals of people who had received full vaccination and that met predefined screening criteria underwent full-text review. We used random-effects meta-regression to estimate the average change in vaccine efficacy or effectiveness 1-6 months after full vaccination.
findingsOf 13 744 studies screened, 310 underwent full-text review, and 18 studies were included (all studies were carried out before the omicron variant began to circulate widely). Risk of bias, established using the risk of bias 2 tool for randomised controlled trials or the risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions tool was low for three studies, moderate for eight studies, and serious for seven studies. We included 78 vaccine-specific vaccine efficacy or effectiveness evaluations (Pfizer-BioNTech-Comirnaty, n=38; Moderna-mRNA-1273, n=23; Janssen-Ad26.COV2.S, n=9; and AstraZeneca-Vaxzevria, n=8). On average, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection decreased from 1 month to 6 months after full vaccination by 21·0 percentage points (95% CI 13·9-29·8) among people of all ages and 20·7 percentage points (10·2-36·6) among older people (as defined by each study, who were at least 50 years old). For symptomatic COVID-19 disease, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness decreased by 24·9 percentage points (95% CI 13·4-41·6) in people of all ages and 32·0 percentage points (11·0-69·0) in older people. For severe COVID-19 disease, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness decreased by 10·0 percentage points (95% CI 6·1-15·4) in people of all ages and 9·5 percentage points (5·7-14·6) in older people. Most (81%) vaccine efficacy or effectiveness estimates against severe disease remained greater than 70% over time.
interpretationCOVID-19 vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against severe disease remained high, although it did decrease somewhat by 6 months after full vaccination. By contrast, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against infection and symptomatic disease decreased approximately 20-30 percentage points by 6 months. The decrease in vaccine efficacy or effectiveness is likely caused by, at least in part, waning immunity, although an effect of bias cannot be ruled out. Evaluating vaccine efficacy or effectiveness beyond 6 months will be crucial for updating COVID-19 vaccine policy.
fundingCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.