Disparities in response to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines according to sex and age: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The rapid development and distribution of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines has been essential in containing the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic around the globe. For ongoing and future immunization campaigns globally, there is a need to evaluate the impact of population demographics such as age and sex, on vaccine efficacy and safety. Methods: This systematic review (PROSPERO ID CRD42023328245) conducted according to PRISMA guidelines evaluates the impact of age and sex on the safety and efficacy of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccinations administrated in 15 studies that were chosen according to strict criteria. The ROBIS tool was applied to evaluate the robustness and the quality of the studies included in the review. Results: After screening, 15 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. The results showed that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines typically elicit robust immune responses, and that younger people have higher antibody levels. Comparing the sexes reveals that higher immunological responses were induced in females, and mild to moderate adverse effects (such as injection site discomfort, exhaustion, and headaches) were also more frequently reported in women. Despite these variations, COVID-19 vaccines have been found to be safe to use across diverse populations, which supports their extensive use in public health initiatives. Conclusion: Our results suggests that tailored vaccination may achieve maximum effectiveness and better tolerability depending on age and sex. Currently study results are rarely stratified by age and sex and this is a deficit in clinical trial publications. More research is needed to elucidate the biological mechanisms underlying the variations in vaccine responses according to age and sex.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".