The Impact of Vaccination on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreaks in the United States

  1. Seyed M Moghadas
  2. Thomas N Vilches
  3. Kevin Zhang
  4. Chad R Wells
  5. Affan Shoukat
  6. Burton H Singer
  7. Lauren Ancel Meyers
  8. Kathleen M Neuzil
  9. Joanne M Langley
  10. Meagan C Fitzpatrick
  11. Alison P Galvani

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

Global vaccine development efforts have been accelerated in response to the devastating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We evaluated the impact of a 2-dose COVID-19 vaccination campaign on reducing incidence, hospitalizations, and deaths in the United States.

Methods

We developed an agent-based model of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and parameterized it with US demographics and age-specific COVID-19 outcomes. Healthcare workers and high-risk individuals were prioritized for vaccination, whereas children under 18 years of age were not vaccinated. We considered a vaccine efficacy of 95% against disease following 2 doses administered 21 days apart achieving 40% vaccine coverage of the overall population within 284 days. We varied vaccine efficacy against infection and specified 10% preexisting population immunity for the base-case scenario. The model was calibrated to an effective reproduction number of 1.2, accounting for current nonpharmaceutical interventions in the United States.

Results

Vaccination reduced the overall attack rate to 4.6% (95% credible interval [CrI]: 4.3%–5.0%) from 9.0% (95% CrI: 8.4%–9.4%) without vaccination, over 300 days. The highest relative reduction (54%–62%) was observed among individuals aged 65 and older. Vaccination markedly reduced adverse outcomes, with non-intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalizations, ICU hospitalizations, and deaths decreasing by 63.5% (95% CrI: 60.3%–66.7%), 65.6% (95% CrI: 62.2%–68.6%), and 69.3% (95% CrI: 65.5%–73.1%), respectively, across the same period.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that vaccination can have a substantial impact on mitigating COVID-19 outbreaks, even with limited protection against infection. However, continued compliance with nonpharmaceutical interventions is essential to achieve this impact.

Article activity feed

  3. Version published to 10.1093/cid/ciab079
  4. Version published to 10.1101/2020.11.27.20240051v2 on medRxiv
  5. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.27.20240051: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our findings should be interpreted within study assumptions and limitations. First, our model vaccinated a large proportion of high-risk individuals, including 70% of healthcare workers [50] and 56% of comorbid individuals. Although this coverage may be difficult to achieve in the short term [51], strategic public health campaigns and transparent communication regarding vaccine safety may be able to improve uptake. Second, we assumed that all vaccinated individuals were willing to receive both doses. If substantial drop-out occurs after the first dose, vaccines could be used more quickly for the general population, and the short-term effect of drop-outs may be minor. Third, the daily number of contacts in the model was age-dependent without consideration of the location of occurrence (e.g., within households, workplaces, and schools). However, this is not expected to change our community-based results, since model calibration would modulate the transmission probability for a given reproduction number. Similarly, any reduction of contacts and variation in contact patterns are accounted for in the calibration process when transmission probability is determined. Finally, the model did not explicitly simulate other mitigation measures (e.g., social distancing, mask-wearing, testing, and contact tracing); however, we calibrated the model to current estimates of the effective reproduction number to account for known compliance with such measures in the US. Further studies are neede...

    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.

    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.

  6. Version published to 10.1101/2020.11.27.20240051v1 on medRxiv