Cited by 114SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies

Waning mRNA-1273 Vaccine Effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Qatar

Open access
Abu-Raddad, Laith J., Chemaitelly, Hiam, Bertollini, Roberto·2022·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

vaccine was associated with neutralization titers against the omicron variant that were 20.0 times higher than those assessed after the second dose of vaccine, and these titers may substantially reduce the risk of breakthrough infection.The decline in neutralization of the omicron variant 6 months after the booster injection was similar to the decline in neutralization titers against the D614G variant 7 months after the second dose.The limitations of our study include small sample sets that may not reflect neutralization in diverse populations, differences in the length of time before boosting among the groups, and a lack of post-boost efficacy data.These limitations may be addressed in further studies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmc2119432

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Matching on sex, age, nationality, and calendar week was previously shown to adequately control for differences in SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk in Qatar.

    “Matching according to these factors was previously shown to provide adequate control of differences in the risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure in studies of different designs, all of which involved control groups, such as test-negative, case–control studies.”
  • The inclusion and exclusion criteria were implemented to allow immunity to build after vaccination and to reduce several potential biases.

    “These inclusion and exclusion criteria were implemented to allow for build-up of immunity after vaccination4,14 and to minimize different types of potential bias, as informed by earlier analyses in the same population.”
  • Extensive sensitivity and additional analyses were conducted to investigate potential bias in earlier studies using similar methods, and these analyses showed consistent findings.

    “Extensive sensitivity and additional analyses were conducted to investigate effects of potential bias in our earlier studies that used similar methods. These included different adjustments and controls in the analysis and different study inclusion and exclusion criteria to investigate whether effectiveness estimates could have been biased.12,22 These analyses showed consistent findings.2,3,12,17,2”
  • Matching was not possible for coexisting conditions, but matching on sex, age, and nationality provided demonstrable control of bias in earlier studies.

    “Although matching was performed according to sex, age, and nationality, matching was not possible for other factors, such as coexisting conditions. However, matching according to these factors provided demonstrable control of bias in our earlier studies.11,12,15,21,22”
  • The findings support the durability of mRNA vaccine protection against COVID-19 hospitalization and death for at least several months after receiving the second dose.

    “These findings support the durability of vaccine protection against COVID-19 hospitalization and death for at least several months after receiving the second dose,13,14,23”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abu-Raddad, L. J., Chemaitelly, H., & Bertollini, R.
Affiliations
  • Weill Cornell Medical College in Qatar (QA)
  • Ministry of Public Health (QA)
Corresponding author
Abu-Raddad, Laith J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2022-03-17
Volume
386
Issue
11
Pages
1091-1093
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W4210488818
Cited by
114
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 51
FWCI
12.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Qatar University QSpace (Qatar University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Biomathematics Research Core at Weill Cornell Medicine–Qatar
  • Qatar Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, Sidra Medicine, Qatar Genome Program, and Qatar University Biomedical Research Center
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Keywords
mRNA-1273 vaccine, SARS-CoV-2, Omicron variant, neutralizing antibodies, waning vaccine effectiveness, breakthrough infection, booster vaccination, D614G mutation, vaccine durability, Qatar
MeSH terms
COVID-19, COVID-19 Vaccines, Vaccine Efficacy, 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273, Female, Humans, Immunization, Secondary, Male, Qatar, Case-Control Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review