Vaccine Effectiveness of BNT162b2 Against Delta and Omicron Variants in Adolescents

  1. Sarah A. Buchan
  2. Lena Nguyen
  3. Sarah E. Wilson
  4. Sophie A. Kitchen
  5. Jeffrey C. Kwong

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 10.1542/peds.2022-057634
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.04.07.22273319: (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.
    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:
    Limitations of this study included an inability to classify some specimens using SGTF or sequencing, changes to test eligibility over the study period, and potential unmeasured confounding between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. These results can inform third dose recommendations in adolescents, as 2-dose protection against symptomatic Omicron infection is relatively low and wanes over time, whereas protection of a second dose against severe outcomes is higher. A third dose substantially improves protection against Omicron infection in adolescents, but 3-dose VE is only moderate at approximately 60% in the early period following vaccination and the duration of this protection is unknown. Understanding the impact of a third dose on improved protection against severe outcomes will be important.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2022.04.07.22273319v1 on medRxiv