Effectiveness of influenza vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers in Qatar

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2022.05.09.22274802: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: Oversight: Hamad Medical Corporation and Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar Institutional Review Boards approved this retrospective study with a waiver of informed consent.
    Consent: Oversight: Hamad Medical Corporation and Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar Institutional Review Boards approved this retrospective study with a waiver of informed consent.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.


    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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    This study has limitations. Effectiveness of only recent influenza vaccination was investigated. The analysis did not factor influenza vaccination from prior seasons. However, given that nonspecific immune activation may not last beyond few weeks, and in context of the relatively rapid waning of COVID-19 vaccine immunity17,25,48-50, the observed effectiveness of influenza vaccination is likely short lived. Matching was done for sex, age, nationality, reason for PCR testing, and bi-weekly PCR test date, but it was not possible for other factors, such as comorbidities. However, matching by these factors successfully controlled bias in our earlier studies17,20,22,25,37. The majority of HCWs in our sample were also young and less likely to be affected by comorbidities. Nonetheless, one cannot exclude the possibility that in real-world data, bias could arise in unexpected ways, or from unknown sources, such as subtle differences or changes in test-seeking behavior. With the young and occupational nature of our population, these findings may not generalize to the elderly population or to the wider general population. Notwithstanding these limitations, extensive sensitivity and additional analyses were conducted to investigate effects of potential bias in this study and in our earlier studies that used the same methodology. These included different adjustments and controls in the analysis and different study inclusion and exclusion criteria, to investigate whether effectiveness esti...

    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.