Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36780914›Full record

SynthesisThe Lancet. Respiratory medicine2023

Long-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against infections, hospitalisations, and mortality in adults: findings from a rapid living systematic evidence synthesis and meta-analysis up to December, 2022.

Nana Wu, Keven Joyal-Desmarais, Paula A B Ribeiro, Ariany Marques Vieira, Jovana Stojanovic, Comfort Sanuade, Doro Yip, Simon L Bacon

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Lancet. Respiratory medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 165 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
165citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

165 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Globally approved vaccines for COVID-19: a systematic review.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2025
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Neonatal and maternal outcomes of mRNA versus Non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2024
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Article

105 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Nana WuMETA Group, Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Health, Kinesiology, and Applied Physiology, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Keven Joyal-DesmaraisMETA Group, Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Health, Kinesiology, and Applied Physiology, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Paula A B RibeiroMETA Group, Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Ariany Marques VieiraMETA Group, Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Health, Kinesiology, and Applied Physiology, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jovana StojanovicMETA Group, Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Comfort SanuadeMETA Group, Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Health, Kinesiology, and Applied Physiology, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Doro YipMETA Group, Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Simon L BaconMETA Group, Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Health, Kinesiology, and Applied Physiology, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada. Electronic address: simon.bacon@concordia.ca.

Funding

CIHR SMC-151518
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSynthesising evidence on the long-term vaccine effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech], mRNA-1273 [Moderna], ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [AZD1222; Oxford-AstraZeneca], and Ad26.COV2.S [Janssen]) against infections, hospitalisations, and mortality is crucial to making evidence-based pandemic policy decisions.

methodsIn this rapid living systematic evidence synthesis and meta-analysis, we searched EMBASE and the US National Institutes of Health's iSearch COVID-19 Portfolio, supplemented by manual searches of COVID-19-specific sources, until Dec 1, 2022, for studies that reported vaccine effectiveness immediately and at least 112 days after a primary vaccine series or at least 84 days after a booster dose. Single reviewers assessed titles, abstracts, and full-text articles, and extracted data, with a second reviewer verifying included studies. The primary outcomes were vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalisations, and mortality, which were assessed using three-level meta-analytic models. This study is registered with the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, review 473.

findingsWe screened 16 696 records at the title and abstract level, appraised 832 (5·0%) full texts, and initially included 73 (0·4%) studies. Of these, we excluded five (7%) studies because of critical risk of bias, leaving 68 (93%) studies that were extracted for analysis. For infections caused by any SARS-CoV-2 strain, vaccine effectiveness for the primary series reduced from 83% (95% CI 80-86) at baseline (14-42 days) to 62% (53-69) by 112-139 days. Vaccine effectiveness at baseline was 92% (88-94) for hospitalisations and 91% (85-95) for mortality, and reduced to 79% (65-87) at 224-251 days for hospitalisations and 86% (73-93) at 168-195 days for mortality. Estimated vaccine effectiveness was lower for the omicron variant for infections, hospitalisations, and mortality at baseline compared with that of other variants, but subsequent reductions occurred at a similar rate across variants. For booster doses, which covered mostly omicron studies, vaccine effectiveness at baseline was 70% (56-80) against infections and 89% (82-93) against hospitalisations, and reduced to 43% (14-62) against infections and 71% (51-83) against hospitalisations at 112 days or later. Not enough studies were available to report on booster vaccine effectiveness against mortality.

interpretationOur analyses indicate that vaccine effectiveness generally decreases over time against SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalisations, and mortality. The baseline vaccine effectiveness levels for the omicron variant were notably lower than for other variants. Therefore, other preventive measures (eg, face-mask wearing and physical distancing) might be necessary to manage the pandemic in the long term.

fundingCanadian Institutes of Health Research and the Public Health Agency of Canada.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesAd26COVS1AdultBNT162 VaccineCanadaChAdOx1 nCoV-19HospitalizationHumansSARS-CoV-2United StatesAd26COVS1BNT162 VaccineChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID36780914
PMCPMC9917454

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.