Back

The impact of vaccination on preventing long COVID in the Omicron era: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Green, R.; Marjenberg, Z.; Lip, G. Y. H.; Banerjee, A.; Wisnivesky, J.; Delaney, B. C.; Peluso, M. J.; Wynberg, E.; Abduljawad, S.

2024-11-20 infectious diseases
10.1101/2024.11.19.24317487 medRxiv
Show abstract

Millions worldwide are living with long COVID. Since therapeutic research is ongoing, long COVID prevention is a pragmatic public health strategy. While prior analyses have shown the benefit of primary vaccination, the effect of booster vaccination on preventing long COVID caused by an Omicron infection has not been fully investigated. This systematic review identified 31 observational studies, among which 11 were deemed suitable for pairwise meta-analyses. Herein, the pooled risk of long COVID was 22-29% (P<0.0001 and P<0.0001, respectively) lower for vaccinated (any vaccination) populations versus unvaccinated (10 studies); 19% (P<0.0001) lower for primary course vaccination versus no vaccination (3 studies); 26% (P<0.0001) lower for booster vaccination versus no vaccination (4 studies) and 23% (P=0.0044) lower for booster vaccination versus primary course vaccination (3 studies). These findings indicate that booster vaccination can provide additional protection against long COVID; thereby, highlighting the importance of seasonal vaccination against new SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Published in Nature Communications (predicted rank #1) · training set

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

Nature Communications · published here
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 18%
9.7%
Similar papers in this journal
2
eClinicalMedicine
○ 77 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.8%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Vaccines
○ 198 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.2%
Similar papers in this journal
4
BMC Medicine
○ 176 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
5.5%
Similar papers in this journal
5
New England Journal of Medicine
● 52 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Nature Medicine
○ 125 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.8%
7
The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
○ 19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
8
BMJ
● 51 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
9
PLOS Medicine
● 110 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.2%
10
Frontiers in Immunology
○ 638 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.4%
50% of probability mass above
11
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
○ 73 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
12
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 43%
2.4%
13
Vaccine
○ 203 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
14
The Lancet
○ 16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
15
JAMA Network Open
● 130 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
16
Clinical Infectious Diseases
◐ 235 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
17
Annals of Internal Medicine
● 28 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
18
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
○ 25 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
19
The Lancet Regional Health - Europe
○ 33 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
20
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.5%
21
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.4%
22
The Lancet Microbe
○ 44 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
23
The Lancet Regional Health - Americas
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
24
npj Vaccines
○ 67 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
25
BMJ Open
● 601 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.1%
26
Nature Microbiology
○ 155 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
27
JAMA
● 18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
28
Journal of Infection and Public Health
○ 15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
29
Communications Medicine
○ 113 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
30
Infectious Diseases and Therapy
○ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%

"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.