MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392124812 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0299304

Protection of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 boosters, and hybrid immunity against Omicron severe illness: A population-based cohort study of five million residents in Canada

2024· article· en· W4392124812 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shishi Wu, Yanhong Li, Stefan Baral, Sharmistha Mishra, Maria Koh, Haley Golding, Jeffrey C. Kwong, Xiaolin Wei

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSt. Michael's HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationHazard ratioCohortConfidence intervalImmunityPopulationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Proportional hazards modelCohort studyInternal medicineImmunologyDiseaseImmune systemInfectious disease (medical specialty)Environmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Evidence on protection of different patterns of infection- and vaccine-acquired immunity against Omicron-associated severe illness is useful in planning booster vaccination strategies. We examined protection of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, a third or a fourth COVID-19 vaccine dose, and hybrid immunity against Omicron-associated severe illness. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This population-based cohort study followed five million individuals with at least one SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test before November 21, 2021 until an Omicron-associatedhospitalization or death. We used Cox regression models to estimate risks of Omicron-associated hospitalization and a composite severe outcome (hospitalized and death), among individuals with infection- and/or vaccination-acquired immunity. Individuals who were unvaccinated and had no history of a prior infection severed as the reference group. Both adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding protection (one minus adjusted HR), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were reported. Three doses provided 94% (95%CI 93-95) and 93% (95%CI 91-94) protection against Omicron-associated hospitalization at 2-3 and ≥3 months post-vaccination respectively, similar to the protection conferred by three doses and a prior infection (2-3 months: 99%, 95%CI 97-100; ≥3 months: 97%, 95%CI 92-99) and four doses (1 month: 87%, 95%CI 79-92; 1-2 months: 96%, 95%CI 92-98). In individuals ≥65 years old, protection of four doses increased to 95% (95%CI 91-98) at 1-2 months, significantly higher than that of three doses over the follow-up period. Similar results were observed with the composite severe outcome. CONCLUSION: At least three antigenic exposures, achieved by vaccination or infection, confers significant protection against Omicron-associated hospitalization and death in all age groups. Our findings support a third dose for the overall population, regardless of prior infection status, and a fourth dose for the elderly to maintain high level of immunity and substantially reduce risk of severe illness at individual level.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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