ArticleCureus2023
Prevalence of Side Effects of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 Vaccine: A Multicenter Experience From Pakistan.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- COVID-19 Vaccines Effectiveness and Safety in Trinidad and Tobago: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- AstraZeneca COVID-19 Vaccine and Diabetes Mellitus: A Prospective Clinical Study Regarding Vaccine Side Effects.Cureus · 2024Article
- Reported side-effects following Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine in the north-west province, Iran: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The most efficient method of combating the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic would be to use effective, safe, and proven vaccines; however, their widespread use has been hampered partly by concerns over possible adverse effects. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the prevalence of Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine side effects among participants. Methods This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study conducted using a non-probability sampling technique. The duration of the study was nine months, from February 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022. The study included 900 participants who provided informed consent and had received two doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine. Demographic characteristics of participants, such as gender, age, comorbidities, AstraZeneca vaccine with both doses along with booster dose, previous exposure to COVID-19 infection, and the prevalence of any local and systemic side effects following the first and second doses of vaccine, were documented. Results The study findings showed that of the 900 participants, 414 (46.0%) were males and 486 (54.0%) were females; their mean age was 40.72 ± 13.47 years. Among them, 198 (22.0%) had hypertension and 144 (16.0%) had diabetes mellitus. Following the first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, pain at the injection site was the most commonly reported side effect in 594 (66.0%) participants. Moreover, swelling at the injection site was the most commonly reported side effect in 522 (58.0%) participants after receiving the second dose of the vaccine. The level of satisfaction showed that the majority of the 648 participants (72.0%) were satisfied with their vaccination. Conclusion This study concluded that pain at the injection site was the most commonly reported side effect, followed by swelling and fever after the first dose of the vaccine. Following the second dose of the vaccine, adverse effects included headache, swelling, and burning at the injection site.
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.