Back

Effectiveness and duration of a second COVID-19 vaccine booster

Jara, A.; Cuadrado, C.; Undurraga, E. A.; Garcia, C.; Najera, M.; Bertoglia, M. P.; Vergara, V.; Fernandez, J.; Garcia, H.; Araos, R.

2022-10-06 infectious diseases
10.1101/2022.10.03.22280660 medRxiv
Show abstract

Using a prospective national cohort of 3.75 million individuals aged 20 or older, we evaluated the effectiveness against COVID-19 related ICU admissions and death of mRNA-based second vaccine boosters for four different three-dose background regimes: BNT162b2 primary series plus a homologous booster, and CoronaVac primary series plus an mRNA booster, a homologous booster, and a ChAdOx-1 booster. We estimated the vaccine effectiveness weekly from February 14 to August 15, 2022, by estimating hazard ratios of immunization over non-vaccination, accounting for relevant confounders. The overall adjusted effectiveness of a second mRNA booster shot was 88.2% (95%CI, 86.2-89.9) and 90.5% (95%CI 89.4-91.4) against ICU admissions and death, respectively. Vaccine effectiveness showed a mild decrease for all regimens and outcomes, probably associated with the introduction of BA.4 and BA.5 Omicron sub-lineages and immunity waning. The duration of effectiveness suggests that no additional boosters are needed six months following a second booster shot.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
New England Journal of Medicine
● 52 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.9%
Similar papers in this journal
2
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
○ 73 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.8%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 16%
11.8%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Nature Medicine
○ 125 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.8%
Similar papers in this journal
5
JAMA Network Open
● 130 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.6%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
6
Clinical Infectious Diseases
◐ 235 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
5.4%
7
BMJ
● 51 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
8
PLOS Medicine
● 110 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.2%
9
The Lancet Regional Health - Americas
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.6%
10
Vaccine
○ 203 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
11
eClinicalMedicine
○ 77 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.1%
12
BMC Medicine
○ 176 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
13
eBioMedicine
○ 183 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
14
Science
● 477 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.1%
15
Med
○ 39 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
16
The Lancet Healthy Longevity
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
17
The Lancet Microbe
○ 44 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
18
JAMA
● 18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
19
Annals of Internal Medicine
● 28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
20
Vaccines
○ 198 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
21
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
○ 129 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
22
Nature Microbiology
○ 155 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
23
The Lancet
○ 16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
24
Journal of Infection
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
25
BMJ Open
● 601 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.6%
26
The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
○ 19 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
27
Journal of Travel Medicine
◐ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.6%
28
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
○ 25 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
29
Nature Immunology
○ 79 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
30
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
○ 62 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%

"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.