Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36506791›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2023

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in prevention of hospitalisations and severe disease in adults with SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant between June 2021 and July 2022: A prospective test negative case-control study.

Anastasia Chatzilena, Catherine Hyams, Rob Challen, Robin Marlow, Jade King, David Adegbite, Jane Kinney, Madeleine Clout, Nick Maskell, Jennifer Oliver and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. mRNA Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2: Advantages and Caveats.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Anastasia ChatzilenaEngineering Mathematics, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Catherine HyamsBristol Vaccine Centre, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, UK.
Rob ChallenEngineering Mathematics, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Robin MarlowBristol Vaccine Centre, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, UK.
Jade KingClinical Research and Imaging Centre, UHBW NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
David AdegbiteBristol Vaccine Centre, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, UK.
Jane KinneyBristol Vaccine Centre, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, UK.
Madeleine CloutBristol Vaccine Centre, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, UK.
Nick MaskellAcademic Respiratory Unit, University of Bristol, UK.
Jennifer OliverBristol Vaccine Centre, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, UK.
Leon DanonEngineering Mathematics, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Adam FinnBristol Vaccine Centre, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, UK.
Avon CAP Research Group
Avon (United States) · USUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_19067Medical Research Council MR/V038613/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Whilst other studies have reported the effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against hospitalisation, including emergency department or intensive care admission, few have assessed effectiveness against other more clinically robust indices of COVID-19 severity. Methods: A prospective single-centre test-negative design case-control study of adults hospitalised with COVID-19 disease or other acute respiratory disease between 1 June 2021 and 20 July 2022. We assessed VE (vaccine effectiveness) against hospitalisation, length of stay [LOS] >3 days, WHO COVID Score >5 and supplementary oxygen FiO Findings: 935 controls and 546 cases were hospitalised during the Delta period, with 721 controls and 372 cases hospitalised during the Omicron study period. Two-dose BNT162b2 was associated with VE 82.5% [95% confidence interval 76.2%-87.2%] against hospitalisation following Delta infection, 63.3% [26.9-81.8%], 58.5% [24.8-77.3%], and 51.5% [16.7-72.1%] against LOS >3 days, WHO COVID Score >5, and requirement for FiO2 >28% respectively. Three-dose BNT162b2 protection against hospitalisation with Omicron infection was 30.9% [5.9-49.3%], with sensitivity analyses ranging from 28.8-72.6%. Protection against LOS >3 days, WHO COVID Score >5 and requirement for FiO2 >28% was 56.1% [20.6-76.5%], 58.8% [31.2-75.8%], and 41.5% [-0.4-66.3%], respectively. In the UK, BNT162b2 was prioritised for high-risk individuals and those aged >75 years. In the latter group we found a higher estimate of VE against hospitalisation of 47.2% [16.8-66.6%]. Interpretation: BNT162b2 vaccination results in risk reductions for hospitalisation and multiple patient outcomes following Delta and Omicron COVID-19 infection, particularly in older adults. BNT162b2 remains effective against severe SARS-CoV-2 disease. Funding: AvonCAP is an investigator-led project funded under a collaborative agreement by Pfizer.

Indexed as

COVID-19Respiratory infectionSARS-CoV-2Vaccination

Identifiers

PMID36506791
PMCPMC9728025
OpenAlexW4311286369

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.