PreprintCited by 135SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy

Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Omicron or Delta variants following a two-dose or booster BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination series: A Danish cohort study

Open access
Hansen, Christian Holm, Schelde, Astrid Blicher, Moustsen-Helm, Ida Rask, Emborg, Hanne-Dorthe, Krause, Tyra Grove, Mølbak, Kåre, Valentiner-Branth, Palle·2021·medRxiv

Abstract

In this brief communication we are showing original research results with early estimates from Danish nationwide databases of vaccine effectiveness (VE) against the novel SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) up to five months after a primary vaccination series with the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines. Our study provides evidence of protection against infection with the Omicron variant after completion of a primary vaccination series with the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines; in particular, we found a VE against the Omicron variant of 55.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 23.5 to 73.7%) and 36.7% (95% CI: -69.9 to 76.4%) for the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines, respectively, in the first month after primary vaccination. However, the VE is significantly lower than that against Delta infection and declines rapidly over just a few months. The VE is re-established upon revaccination with the BNT162b2 vaccine (54.6%, 95% CI: 30.4 to 70.4%).

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 · 10.1101/2021.12.20.21267966

Cites

1 of 2 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Andrews N, Stowe J, Kirsebom F, et al. Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of concern [Preprint]. https://khub.net/documents/135939561/430986542/Effectiveness+of+COVID- 19+vaccines+against+Omicron+variant+of+concern.pdf/f423c9f4-91cb-0274-c8c5-70e8fad50074

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hansen, C. H., Schelde, A. B., Moustsen-Helm, I. R., Emborg, H.-D., Krause, T. G., Mølbak, K., & Valentiner-Branth, P.
Affiliations
Statens Serum Institut (DK)
Venue
medRxiv
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2021-12-21
OpenAlex
W4200175757
Cited by
133
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 97
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
medRxiv (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Keywords
vaccine effectiveness, SARS-CoV-2, Omicron variant, Delta variant, BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, COVID-19 vaccines, booster vaccination, waning immunity, Danish cohort

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