MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139383021 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.03.058

Projecting the impact of a two-dose COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Ontario, Canada

2021· article· en· W3139383021 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Thomas N. Vilches, Kevin Zhang, Robert Van Exan, Joanne M. Langley, Seyed M. Moghadas

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health AuthorityIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie UniversityYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsVaccinationMedicineOutbreakPsychological interventionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Mass vaccinationPediatricsImmunologyInternal medicineDiseaseVirologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A number of highly effective COVID-19 vaccines have been developed and approved for mass vaccination. We evaluated the impact of vaccination on COVID-19 outbreak and disease outcomes in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We used an agent-based transmission model and parameterized it with COVID-19 characteristics, demographics of Ontario, and age-specific clinical outcomes. We implemented a two-dose vaccination program according to tested schedules in clinical trials for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, prioritizing healthcare workers, individuals with comorbidities, and those aged 65 and older. Daily vaccination rate was parameterized based on vaccine administration data. Using estimates of vaccine efficacy, we projected the impact of vaccination on the overall attack rate, hospitalizations, and deaths. We further investigated the effect of increased daily contacts at different stages during vaccination campaigns on outbreak control. RESULTS: Maintaining non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) with an average of 74% reduction in daily contacts, vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines was projected to reduce hospitalizations by 27.3% (95% CrI: 22.3% - 32.4%) and 27.0% (95% CrI: 21.9% - 32.6%), respectively, over a one-year time horizon. The largest benefits of vaccination were observed in preventing deaths with reductions of 31.5% (95% CrI: 22.5% - 39.7%) and 31.9% (95% CrI: 22.0% - 41.4%) for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, respectively, compared to no vaccination. We found that an increase of only 10% in daily contacts at the end of lockdown, when vaccination coverage with only one dose was 6%, would trigger a surge in the outbreak. Early relaxation of population-wide measures could lead to a substantial increase in the number of infections, potentially reaching levels observed during the peak of the second wave in Ontario. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination can substantially mitigate ongoing COVID-19 outbreaks. Sustaining population-wide NPIs, to allow for a sufficient increase in population-level immunity through vaccination, is essential to prevent future outbreaks.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccineSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207