Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant

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 10.1101/2021.05.22.21257658: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    RandomizationA maximum of 3 randomly chosen negative test results were included per person.
    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:
    Compared to recent findings from Qatar comparing the effectiveness of BNT162b2 against the B.1.1.7 and B1.351 variants, our findings would suggest that effectiveness against B.1.617.2 after a full course lies somewhere between these two.(17) Strengths and limitations: The large scale of testing and whole genome sequencing in the UK as well as the recording of vaccination status in a national vaccination register has allowed us to analyse vaccine effectiveness within a few weeks of the variant first emerging in the UK. We use two distinct analytical approaches which give broadly similar results and findings with our control analysis (using B.1.1.7) are consistent with those previously reported.(7, 8, 10, 17) Findings were also similar when comparing to the first 2 weeks post the first dose of vaccine (supplement), which helps to exclude unmeasured confounders associated with both the likelihood of being vaccinated and the likelihood of being exposed to a variant. Using a TNCC design also helped us to control for differences in health seeking behaviour between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. There are also limitations to this study. These are observational findings and should be interpreted with caution. There may be factors that could increase the risk of COVID-19 in vaccinated individuals, for example if they adopt more risky behaviours following vaccination, however, this would be likely to affect analysis of both variants. Low sensitivity or specificity of PCR test...

    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.