Comparison of adverse events between COVID-19 and Flu vaccines
Pradhan, P. M.; Li, C.; Shen, Z.; Remucal, M. J.
10.1101/2021.09.22.21263711 medRxivShow abstract
BACKGROUNDAmong the various driving factors for vaccine hesitancy, confidence in the safety associated with the vaccine constitutes as one of the key factors. This study aimed at comparing the adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines with the Flu vaccines. METHODSThe VAERS data from 01/01/2020 to 08/20/2021 were used. The MedDRA terms coded by VAERS were further aggregated by a clinician into clinically meaningful broader terms. RESULTSVarious common adverse events between Flu and COVID-19 vaccines have been identified. Adverse events such as headache and fever were very common across all age groups. Among the common adverse events between Flu and COVID-19 vaccine, the relative risk along with 95% CI indicated that such common adverse events were more likely to be experienced by COVID-19 vaccine users than Flu vaccine users. Our study also quantified the proportion of rare adverse events such as Guillain Barre Syndrome and Gynecological changes in the VAERS database for COVID-19 vaccines. CONCLUSIONSBased on the available data and results, it appears that there were some common adverse events between Flu vaccines and COVID-19 vaccines. These identified common adverse events warrant further investigations based on the relative risk and 95% CI.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of Biological E’s CORBEVAX™ vaccine in children and adolescents: A Prospective, Randomised, Double-blind, Placebo controlled, Phase-2/3 Study 96%
- Evaluation of Febrile Seizure Risk Following Ancestral Monovalent COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination Among U.S. Children Aged 2-5 Years 95%
- A randomized, double-blind phase I clinical trial of two recombinant dimeric RBD COVID-19 vaccine candidates: safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Safety and immunogenicity of the BBIBP-CorV vaccine in adolescents aged 12-17 years in Thai population, prospective cohort study 97%
- Immunogenicity and adverse events of priming with inactivated whole SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac) followed by boosting the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine 96%
- Analysis of immunization, adverse events, and efficacy of a fourth dose of BNT162b2 vaccine 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Immunogenicity and safety of Quadrivalent Influenza HA vaccine compared with Trivalent Influenza HA vaccine and evaluation of Quadrivalent Influenza HA vaccine batch-to-batch consistency in Indonesian children and adults 95%
- Covid-19 Vaccination in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review 95%
- Immunogenicity and safety of a recombinant adenovirus type-5 COVID-19 vaccine in adults: data from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-dose, phase 3 trial in Russia 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Safety and Immunogenicity of CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 Against the SARS-CoV-2 Circulating Variants of Concern (Alpha, Delta, Beta) in Thai Healthcare Workers 94%
- Side Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines and Perceptions about COVID-19 and Its Vaccines in Bangladesh 94%
- Psychosocial factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK: a prospective cohort study (CoVAccS – wave 3) 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Safety and immunogenicity of SCB-2019, an adjuvanted, recombinant SARS-CoV-2 trimeric S-protein subunit COVID-19 vaccine in healthy 12–17 year-old adolescents 95%
- Safety and immunogenicity of a heterologous booster with an RBD virus-like particle vaccine following two- or three-dose inactivated COVID-19 vaccine 94%
- Immunogenicity and reactogenicity against the SARS-CoV-2 variants following heterologous primary series involving CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 plus heterologous BNT162b2 booster vaccination: An open-label randomized study in healthy Thai adults 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.