COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness in a Diverse Urban Health Care Worker Population

  1. Eirini Iliaki
  2. Fan-Yun Lan
  3. Costas A. Christophi
  4. Guido Guidotti
  5. Alexander D. Jobrack
  6. Jane Buley
  7. Neetha Nathan
  8. Rebecca Osgood
  9. Lou Ann Bruno-Murtha
  10. Stefanos N. Kales

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.mayocp.2021.10.005
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.09.02.21263038: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: The data we used were de-identified, the need for a consent was waived and the study was exempted by the Cambridge Health Alliance Institutional Review Board.
    IRB: The data we used were de-identified, the need for a consent was waived and the study was exempted by the Cambridge Health Alliance Institutional Review Board.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analyses were performed using the SAS software version 9.4
    SAS
    suggested: (SASqPCR, RRID:SCR_003056)

    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:
    Limitations include the fact that this was not a randomised clinical trial and may be subject to biases and confounders that could skew the results. For example, vaccinated individuals may take more precautions due to being more health-conscious, but conversely may take fewer precautions due to perceived vaccination-induced protection. Thus, we do not expect any significant influence on our results. The infection rates decreased during the study period and may have potentiated the vaccine effectiveness, although we controlled for the 7-day MA infection rate. Since we do not conduct regular surveillance of the entire HCW population, there may have been additional asymptomatic breakthrough infections. Nonetheless, no asymptomatic cases were detected for the subset of HCW participating in surveillance testing, and there were no clusters of employee infections connected to non fully vaccinated individuals since the vaccination program started until the end of the study. This points to the fact that even if there was forward transmission, this was largely asymptomatic and non-consequential.

    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.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.09.02.21263038v1 on medRxiv