MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3154036034 · doi:10.1101/2021.04.07.21255094

Modelling the impact of extending dose intervals for COVID-19 vaccines in Canada

2021· preprint· en· W3154036034 on OpenAlexaffabout
Austin Nam, Raphael Ximenes, Man Wah Yeung, Sharmistha Mishra, Matthew Tunis, Beate Sander

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkPublic Health OntarioYork UniversityPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationPandemicPopulationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ImmunizationConfidence intervalVaccine efficacyDemographyDiseaseEnvironmental healthInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)VirologyImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Dual dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccines demonstrate high efficacy and will be critical in public health efforts to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic and its health consequences; however, many jurisdictions face very constrained vaccine supply. We examined the impacts of extending the interval between two doses of mRNA vaccines in Canada in order to inform deliberations of Canada’s National Advisory Committee on Immunization. Methods We developed an age-stratified, deterministic, compartmental model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and disease to reproduce the epidemiologic features of the epidemic in Canada. Simulated vaccination comprised mRNA vaccines with explicit examination of effectiveness against disease (67% [first dose], 94% [second dose]), hospitalization (80% [first dose], 96% [second dose]), and death (85% [first dose], 96% [second dose]) in adults aged 20 years and older. Effectiveness against infection was assumed to be 90% relative to the effectiveness against disease. We used a 6-week mRNA dose interval as our base case (consistent with early program rollout across Canadian and international jurisdictions) and compared extended intervals of 12 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks. We began vaccinations on January 1, 2021 and simulated a third wave beginning on April 1, 2021. Results Extending mRNA dose intervals were projected to result in 12.1-18.9% fewer symptomatic cases, 9.5-13.5% fewer hospitalizations, and 7.5-9.7% fewer deaths in the population over a 12-month time horizon. The largest reductions in hospitalizations and deaths were observed in the longest interval of 24 weeks, though benefits were diminishing as intervals extended. Benefits of extended intervals stemmed largely from the ability to accelerate coverage in individuals aged 20-74 years as older individuals were already prioritized for early vaccination. Conditions under which mRNA dose extensions led to worse outcomes included: first-dose effectiveness < 65% against death; or protection following first dose waning to 0% by month three before the scheduled 2 nd dose at 24-weeks. Probabilistic simulations from a range of likely vaccine effectiveness values did not result in worse outcomes with extended intervals. Conclusion Under real-world effectiveness conditions, our results support a strategy of extending mRNA dose intervals across all age groups to minimize symptomatic cases, hospitalizations, and deaths while vaccine supply is constrained.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research→French-language works237,207→