MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410795630 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127291

Risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome after COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection: A multinational self-controlled case series study

2025· article· en· W4410795630 on OpenAlexaff
Sharifa Nasreen, Yannan Jiang, Lu Han, Arier Lee, Clare Cutland, Ángela Gentile, Norberto Giglio, Kristine Macartney, Lucy Deng, Bette Liu, Nicole Sonneveld, Karen Bellamy, Hazel J Clothier, Gonzalo Sepulveda Kattan, Monika Naus, Zaeema Naveed, Naveed Z. Janjua, Lena Nguyen, Anders Hviid, Eero Poukka, Jori Perälä, Tuija Leino, Lukman Ade Chandra, Jarir At Thobari, Byung‐Joo Park, Nam‐Kyong Choi, Na‐Young Jeong, Shabir A. Madhi, Felipe Villalobos, Martín Solórzano, Carlo Alberto Bissacco, Juan José Carreras-Martínez, Elisa Correcher-Martínez, Arantxa Urchueguía-Fornes, Debabrata Roy, Alison Yeomans, Taylor Aurelius, Kathryn A. Morton, G Mauro, Miriam Sturkenboom, James J. Sejvar, Karina A. Top, Karin Batty, Luam Ghebreab, Jennifer Griffin, Helen Petousis‐Harris, Jim Buttery, Steven Black, Jeffrey C. Kwong

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuillain-Barre syndromeCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakMedicineVaccinationVirologyMultinational corporationBetacoronavirusImmunologyOutbreakPolitical scienceInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The association between Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) and certain COVID-19 vaccines is inconclusive. We investigated the risk of GBS after COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Using a common protocol, we conducted a self-controlled case series study from 1 December 2020 to 9 August 2023 at 20 global sites within the Global Vaccine Data Network™ (GVDN®). Brighton Collaboration case definition criteria were used to determine the level of certainty (LOC) of medical record-reviewed GBS cases at 15 sites. GBS cases following SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified from electronic data sources (EDS) from 11 sites. We estimated the relative incidence (RI) of GBS within 1-42 days following receipt of adenoviral vector, mRNA, or inactivated COVID-19 vaccines or SARS-CoV-2 infection using conditional Poisson regression models, controlling for seasonality. We used random effects meta-analysis to pool the estimates across sites. RESULTS: Of 410 medical record-reviewed post-vaccination GBS cases (out of 2086 EDS-identified cases), 49 were LOC 1 or 2, 187 were LOC 3 or 4, and 174 were LOC 5. These cases received a total of 794 doses of COVID-19 vaccines (160 [20 %] adenoviral vector vaccine doses, 556 [70 %] mRNA vaccine doses, 77 [10 %] inactivated vaccine doses, and 1 [0.1 %] protein-based vaccine dose) during the observation period. We observed an increased risk of confirmed (LOC 1-2) GBS after receiving ChAdOx1-S/nCoV-19 (Vaxzevria/Covishield) (RI = 3.10; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.12-8.62). Decreased risks of LOC 1-4 GBS were observed after receiving BNT162b2 (Comirnaty/Tozinameran) (RI = 0.48; 95 %CI, 0.27-0.85) and CoronaVac/Sinovac (RI = 0.04; 95 %CI, 0.00-0.61). For 489 EDS-identified GBS cases after SARS-CoV-2 infection, we found GBS risk to be increased (RI = 3.35; 95 %CI, 1.83-6.11). CONCLUSION: In this large multinational study, we found increased risks of GBS within 42 days after Vaxzevria/Covishield vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection, and decreased risks after receiving Comirnaty/Tozinameran or CoronaVac/Sinovac COVID-19 vaccines.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccineSame topicPeripheral Neuropathies and DisordersFrench-language works237,207