MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387568895 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofad479

Primary Series and Booster Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine Effectiveness in a Cohort of Healthcare Workers in Albania During a BA.1 and BA.2 Variant Period, January–May 2022

2023· article· en· W4387568895 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Iris Finci, Madelyn Yiseth Rojas Castro, Iris Hasibra, Jonilda Sulo, Albana Fico, Rovena Daja, Adela Vasili, Majlinda Kota, Iria Preza, Barbara Mühlemann, Christian Drosten, Richard Pebody, Kathryn E. Lafond, Esther Kissling, Mark A. Katz, Silvia Bino

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionFreie Universität BerlinHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinCharité – Universitätsmedizin BerlinDeutsches Zentrum für InfektionsforschungTask Force for Global HealthCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaBerlin Institute of HealthWorld Health Organization
KeywordsBooster (rocketry)MedicineCohortPrimary careHealth careVirologyPrimary health careHealthcare systemBooster doseInternal medicineFamily medicineVirusEnvironmental healthEconomic growthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) have experienced high rates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) morbidity and mortality. We estimated COVID-19 2-dose primary series and monovalent booster vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron (BA.1 and BA.2) infection among HCWs in 3 Albanian hospitals during January-May 2022. Methods: Study participants completed weekly symptom questionnaires, underwent polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing when symptomatic, and provided quarterly blood samples for serology. We estimated VE using Cox regression models (1 - hazard ratio), with vaccination status as the time-varying exposure and unvaccinated HCWs as the reference group, adjusting for potential confounders: age, sex, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (detected by PCR, rapid antigen test, or serology), and household size. Results: At the start of the analysis period, 76% of 1462 HCWs had received a primary series, 10% had received a booster dose, and 9% were unvaccinated; 1307 (89%) HCWs had evidence of prior infection. Overall, 86% of primary series and 98% of booster doses received were BNT162b2. The median time interval from the second dose and the booster dose to the start of the analysis period was 289 (interquartile range [IQR], 210-292) days and 30 (IQR, 22-46) days, respectively. VE against symptomatic PCR-confirmed infection was 34% (95% confidence interval [CI], -36% to 68%) for the primary series and 88% (95% CI, 39%-98%) for the booster. Conclusions: NCT04811391.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207