The Role of COVID-19 Vaccinal Status in Admitted Children during OMICRON Variant Circulation in Rio de Janeiro, City—Preliminary Report

  1. André Araujo da Silva
  2. Bernardo de Carvalho
  3. Monica Esteves
  4. Cristiane Teixeira
  5. Cristina Souza

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate COVID-19 vaccination status in admitted children in 2020–2021 and during the OMICRON variant circulation (2022), a period when children older than 12 years of age had received two doses of COVID-19 vaccines. Design: An observational retrospective study. Patients with confirmed COVID-19 were compared in two different periods: 2020–2021 when adolescents aged 12–18 years had not received the complete COVID-19 vaccine, and 2022 when children older than 12 years had received the complete Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine scheme. Setting: Two pediatric hospitals in Rio de Janeiro city. Patients: Children aged < 18 years with confirmed COVID-19. Intervention: None. Main outcome: Vaccination status for COVID-19 on admission. Results: In total, 300 patients were admitted with confirmed COVID-19 (240 in 2020–2021 and 60 in 2022). The distribution of patients according to the age-groups was: 0–2 years (33.3% in 2020–2021 and 53.4% in 2022), 2–5 years (21.7% in 2020–2021 and 10% in 2022), 5–11 years (29.2% in 2020–2021 and 28.3% in 2022), and 12–18 years (15.8% in 2020–2021 and 8.3% in 2022) (p = 0.076). The median length of stay was six days in 2020–2021 and six days in 2022 (p = 0.423). We verified six deaths in the first analysis period and one death in the second one (p = 0.894). Of the 60 children admitted in 2022, 58 (96.7%) did not receive the complete COVID-19 vaccine scheme available. Conclusions: We verified in a “real-world condition” the ability of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine to prevent hospitalization in children over 12 years of age.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.3390/vaccines10040619
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.02.10.22270817: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: The study was submitted and approved by Ethics Committee of Faculty of Medicine (Universidade Federal Fluminense) and Prontobaby Group, under number 4.100.232 dated from June 20, 2020.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    A descriptive analyses of age, gender, lengh of stay, outcomes and vaccinal status was performed using Microsoft Excel.
    Microsoft Excel
    suggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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 10.1101/2022.02.10.22270817v1 on medRxiv