Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 related hospital admission in the Netherlands: A test-negative case-control study

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 10.1101/2021.11.09.21266060: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: CIMS), containing data on COVID-19 vaccination of all Dutch citizens who provided consent; it is estimated that 93% of vaccinated persons give 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:
    Our findings are subject to a few limitations. First, we were not able to take into account immune status before hospitalization because serology was not consistently performed at admission, and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection was not consistently reported. This might have underestimated our VE-estimates. Second, our results are not representative for the VE against the delta variant, affecting the generalizability in the current epidemiologic situation. However, recent studies suggest that the VE against hospitalization is also very high in settings with dominance of the delta variant (10, 20). Third, most patients were only partially vaccinated. Therefore, our study was underpowered to measure the effect of full vaccination in many subgroups. Fourth, it was not feasible to only include patients admitted because of suspected COVID-19 because SARS-CoV-2 PCR at admission is not reserved for patients suspected of a respiratory infection. Residual bias due to health-seeking behavior otherwise mitigated by the test negative design might therefore still exist. Based on the patient characteristics we suspect the control group to consist partially of chronically ill patients admitted for an acute deterioration of their respiratory or cardiac condition. This might have underestimated the VE since the sensitivity analysis showed higher VE estimates in a more infection-specific subgroup. Fifth, residual confounding due to unmeasured factors such as ethnicity might have biased our estimates....

    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.