SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibodies in Chile after a Vaccination Campaign with Five Different Schemes
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Using levels of neutralizing antibodies (nAbs), we evaluate the successful Chilean SARS-CoV-2 vaccine campaign, which combines different vaccine technologies and heterologous boosters. From a population-based study performed in November 2021, we randomly selected 120 seropositive individuals, organized into six groups of positive samples (20 subjects each) according to natural infection history and the five most frequent vaccination schemes. We conclude that the booster dose, regardless of vaccine technology or natural infection, and mRNA vaccines significantly improve nAbs response.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2022.05.03.22274622: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not 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: 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:…
SciScore for 10.1101/2022.05.03.22274622: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not 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: 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.
-
