Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36069511›Full record

SynthesisEmerging microbes & infections2022

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern in real-world: a literature review and meta-analysis.

Weihao Shao, Xiaorui Chen, Caifang Zheng, Haoshuang Liu, Gaili Wang, Bowen Zhang, Zhiyuan Li, Weidong Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Emerging microbes & infections, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Safety and Immunogenicity of a Fourth Dose of Omicron BA.1-Adapted BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults 18-55 Years Old.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Weihao ShaoDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0003-0362-6474
Xiaorui ChenDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, People's Republic of China.
Caifang ZhengDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, People's Republic of China.
Haoshuang LiuDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, People's Republic of China.
Gaili WangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, People's Republic of China.
Bowen ZhangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, People's Republic of China.
Zhiyuan LiDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, People's Republic of China.
Weidong ZhangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-0314-7820
Zhengzhou University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Knowing vaccine effectiveness (VE) against variants of concern (VOCs) in the real-world setting is essential for public health decision-making. A systematic landscape of the VE against a series of clinical outcomes caused by the VOCs in the real-world setting is needed. We systematically searched for studies that evaluated VE against VOCs in the real-world setting and collected individual data. We identified 113 studies meeting the eligibility criteria. We found full vaccination provided strong protection against each clinical outcome with summary VE ranging from 86.8% to 96.0% Alpha, moderate protection against infection caused by Beta, Gamma and Delta with summary VE ranging from 70.9% to 72.8%, strong protection against severe disease caused by Delta with summary VE ranging from 84.9% to 90.3%, limited protection with summary VE of 23.5% (95% CI, 17.0-29.5) against infection and moderate protection with summary VE ranging from 56.5% to 82.4% against severe diseases caused by Omicron. Booster vaccination can provide a substantial improvement in protection against Delta and Omicron, but not as much as the Delta. The meta-regression analysis showed that the VE against the Omicron wanned over time, and the VE against hospitalization declined relatively slowly, compared to against infection. Those findings supported the need for public health measures, increasing booster vaccination coverage in response to current and new infectious waves driven by variants and developing broadly protective vaccines to confront virus evolution.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansSARS-CoV-2VaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19 vaccine effectivenessmeta-analysisreal-world studySARS-CoV-2variants of concern

Identifiers

PMID36069511
PMCPMC9542696
OpenAlexW4294916264

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.