Cited by 115SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchVaccine Coverage and HesitancyCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies

Vaccine effectiveness of primary series and booster doses against covid-19 associated hospital admissions in the United States: living test negative design study

Open access
Adams, Katherine, Rhoads, Jillian P, Surie, Diya, Gaglani, Manjusha, Ginde, Adit A, McNeal, Tresa, Talbot, H Keipp, Casey, Jonathan D +32 more·2022·BMJ

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of a primary covid-19 vaccine series plus booster doses with a primary series alone for the prevention of hospital admission with omicron related covid-19 in the United States. Design: Multicenter observational case-control study with a test negative design. Setting: Hospitals in 18 US states. Participants: 4760 adults admitted to one of 21 hospitals with acute respiratory symptoms between 26 December 2021 and 30 June 2022, a period when the omicron variant was dominant. Participants included 2385 (50.1%) patients with laboratory confirmed covid-19 (cases) and 2375 (49.9%) patients who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (controls). Main outcome measures: The main outcome was vaccine effectiveness against hospital admission with covid-19 for a primary series plus booster doses and a primary series alone by comparing the odds of being vaccinated with each of these regimens versus being unvaccinated among cases versus controls. Vaccine effectiveness analyses were stratified by immunosuppression status (immunocompetent, immunocompromised). The primary analysis evaluated all covid-19 vaccine types combined, and secondary analyses evaluated specific vaccine products. Results: Overall, median age of participants was 64 years (interquartile range 52-75 years), 994 (20.8%) were immunocompromised, 85 (1.8%) were vaccinated with a primary series plus two boosters, 1367 (28.7%) with a primary series plus one booster, and 1875 (39.3%) with a primary series alone, and 1433 (30.1%) were unvaccinated. Among immunocompetent participants, vaccine effectiveness for prevention of hospital admission with omicron related covid-19 for a primary series plus two boosters was 63% (95% confidence interval 37% to 78%), a primary series plus one booster was 65% (58% to 71%), and for a primary series alone was 37% (25% to 47%) (P<0.001 for the pooled boosted regimens compared with a primary series alone). Vaccine effectiveness was higher for a boosted regimen than for a primary series alone for both mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech): 73% (44% to 87%) for primary series plus two boosters, 64% (55% to 72%) for primary series plus one booster, and 36% (21% to 48%) for primary series alone (P<0.001); mRNA-1273 (Moderna): 68% (17% to 88%) for primary series plus two boosters, 65% (55% to 73%) for primary series plus one booster, and 41% (25% to 54%) for primary series alone (P=0.001)). Among immunocompromised patients, vaccine effectiveness for a primary series plus one booster was 69% (31% to 86%) and for a primary series alone was 49% (30% to 63%) (P=0.04). Conclusion: During the first six months of 2022 in the US, booster doses of a covid-19 vaccine provided additional benefit beyond a primary vaccine series alone for preventing hospital admissions with omicron related covid-19. Readers’ note: This article is a living test negative design study that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication.

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 · 10.1136/bmj-2022-072065

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • A booster dose administered at least 5 months after the primary series of mRNA vaccines restores protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes.

    “a booster dose administered at least 5 months after the primary series of mRNA vaccines restores protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes,12–14”

    From Protection of the third-dose and fourth-dose mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariant: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2023) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Results (page unavailable) report greater protection against COVID-19-associated hospital admission after mRNA booster doses than after a primary series alone. The paper does not establish protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection generally or show that the reported benefit depends on administering the booster at least five months after the primary series; its time-stratified results concern time since the last dose. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 5

  1. [17]Klann JG Strasser ZH Hutch MR Consortium for Clinical Characterization of COVID-19 by EHR (4CE). Distinguishing Admissions Specifically for COVID-19 from Incidental SARS-CoV-2 Admissions: A National EHR Research Consortium Study. medRxiv 2022; 2022.02.10.22270728. 10.1101/2022.02.10.22270728. 35350202 PMC8963684 · DOI
  2. [31]Lauring AS Tenforde MW Chappell JD Influenza and Other Viruses in the Acutely Ill (IVY) Network. Clinical severity of, and effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against, covid-19 from omicron, delta, and alpha SARS-CoV-2 variants in the United States: prospective observational study. BMJ 2022; 376: e069761. 10.1136/bmj-2021-069761. 35264324 PMC8905308 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [42]Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Science Brief: SARS-CoV-2 Infection-induced and Vaccine-induced Immunity. Cent. Dis. Control Prev. 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/vaccine-induced-immunity.html (accessed 13 Aug 2022). 34748301
  4. [43]Ostropolets A Hripcsak G. COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness rates by week and sources of bias. Health Informatics 2021. 10.1101/2021.12.22.21268253 PMC9402447 35998962 · DOI
  5. [45]Chua H Feng S Lewnard JA. The Use of Test-negative Controls to Monitor Vaccine Effectiveness: A Systematic Review of Methodology. Epidemiology 2020; 31: 43- 64. 10.1097/EDE.0000000000001116. 31609860 PMC6888869 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Adams, K., Rhoads, J. P., Surie, D., Gaglani, M., Ginde, A. A., McNeal, T., Talbot, H. K., Casey, J. D., Zepeski, A., Shapiro, N. I., Gibbs, K. W., Files, D. C., Hager, D. N., Frosch, A. E., Exline, M. C., Mohamed, A., Johnson, N. J., Steingrub, J. S., Peltan, I. D., Brown, S. M., Martin, E. T., Lauring, A. S., Khan, A., Busse, L. W., Duggal, A., Wilson, J. G., Chang, S. Y., Mallow, C., Kwon, J. H., Chappell, J. D., Halasa, N., Grijalva, C. G., Lindsell, C. J., Lester, S. N., Thornburg, N. J., Park, S., McMorrow, M. L., Patel, M. M., Tenforde, M. W., & Self, W. H.
Affiliations
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
  • Baylor Scott & White Medical Center - Temple (US)
  • University of Colorado Anschutz (US)
  • University of Iowa (US)
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
  • Hennepin County Medical Center (US)
  • Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
  • Emory University (US)
  • Baystate Medical Center (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of Miami (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Adams, Katherine
  • Self, Wesley H
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2022-10-11
Volume
379
Pages
e072065
ISSN
1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4304185672
Cited by
115
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 13
FWCI
13.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Keywords
COVID-19 vaccines, vaccine effectiveness, booster vaccination, hospitalization, Omicron variant, immunocompromised patients, mRNA vaccines, BNT162b2, immunosuppression, test-negative design, SARS-CoV-2, hospitalized patients, United States

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