Antibody responses after a single dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in healthcare workers previously infected with SARS-CoV-2

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.08.21256866: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: The study was approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority, and informed written consent was obtained from all participants.
    Sex as a biological variableOf these, 149 participants received two doses of BNT162b2 vaccine (36 previously infected participants with median age 52 (IQR 41-62), 86% female, and 113 SARS-CoV-2-naïve participants with median age 53 (IQR 42-58), 86 % women), and 83 participants received a single-dose ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (46 participants ≥ 11 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection with median age 49 (IQR 41-60), 83% female, and 37 participants < 11 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection with median age 48 (IQR 40-54), 95 % women).
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    For validation, spike-specific IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 wild type were measured in the same samples using the multiplex antigen bead array (FlexMap3D, Luminex Corp) (10).
    spike-specific IgG
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism 9.1.0 (GraphPad Software, Inc, USA).
    GraphPad Prism
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)
    GraphPad
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.