Cited by 36Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug ReactionsSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchLong-Term Effects of COVID-19

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Analysis of Neurological Adverse Events Reported in VigiBase From COVID-19 Vaccines

Open access

Abstract

Background: Fifteen COVID-19 vaccines have been granted emergency approval before the completion of conventional phases of clinical trials. The present study aimed to analyze the neurological adverse events (AEs) post-COVID-19 vaccination and focuses on determining the association of AEs with the vaccine. Methodology: The neurological AEs reported for COVID-19 vaccines in the WHO pharmacovigilance database (VigiBase) were extracted from the System Organ Classes - neurological disorders and investigations. Descriptive statistics are reported as percentage and frequency and the disproportionality analysis was also conducted. Results: For the neurological system, 19,529 AEs were reported. Of these, 15,638 events were reported from BNT162b2 vaccine, 2,751 from AZD1222 vaccine, 1,075 from mRNA-1273 vaccine, eight from Vero vaccine, two from Covaxin, and for 55 AEs, vaccine name was not mentioned. The reason for more AEs reported with BNT162b2 can be maximum vaccination with BNT162b2 vaccine in the study period. According to the disproportionality analysis based on IC025 value, ageusia, anosmia, burning sensation, dizziness, facial paralysis, headache, hypoaesthesia, lethargy, migraine, neuralgia, paresis, parosmia, poor sleep quality, seizure, transient ischemic attack, and tremor are some of the AEs that can be associated with the administration of the vaccine. Conclusion: The vaccines should be monitored for these AEs till the causality of these AEs with COVID-19 vaccines is established through further long-term follow-up studies. These neurological AEs reported in VigiBase should not be taken as conclusive and mass vaccination should be carried out to control the pandemic until a definite link of these adverse effects is established.

Overview

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 · 10.7759/cureus.21376

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

  • Using data from three postmarketing safety databases for vaccines (VAERS, EudraVigilance, and VigiBase), disproportionality studies have reported excess risks for many of the same SAE types as in the present study.

    “Using data from three postmarketing safety databases for vaccines (VAERS, EudraVigilance, and VigiBase), disproportionality studies have reported excess risks for many of the same SAE types as in the present study. [21-23]”

    From Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adults (2022) · cites this paper as [21]

    The Materials and methods section describes a VigiBase disproportionality analysis, and the Abstract reports signals for neurological events including facial paralysis, seizure, and transient ischemic attack (page numbers unavailable). This supports the VigiBase portion of the sentence, but the paper does not establish excess clinical risks or show that all the signaled events were serious adverse events; its Conclusions caution that causality could not be assessed. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. Dutta S, Kaur RJ, Bhardwaj P, et al.. Household transmission of COVID-19: a cross-sectional study. Infect Drug Resist. 2020, 13:4637-42. 10.2147/IDR.S285446 · DOI
  2. Godman B, Haque M, Islam S, et al.. Rapid assessment of price instability and paucity of medicines and protection for COVID-19 across Asia: findings and public health implications for the future. Front Public Health. 2020, 8:585832. 10.3389/fpubh.2020.585832 · DOI
  3. Haque M, Kumar S, Charan J, et al.. Utilisation, availability and price changes of medicines and protection equipment for COVID-19 among selected regions in India: fndings and implications. Front Pharmacol. 2020, 11:582154. 10.3389/fphar.2020.582154 · DOI
  4. Charan J, Bhardwaj P, Dutta S, et al.. Use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and home remedies by COVID-19 patients: a telephonic survey. Indian J Clin Biochem. 2021, 36:108-11. 10.1007%2Fs12291-020-00931-4 · DOI
  5. Charan J, Dutta S, Kaur R, et al.. Tocilizumab in COVID-19: a study of adverse drug events reported in the WHO database. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2021, 20:1125-36. 10.1080/14740338.2021.1946513 · DOI
  6. Dutta S, Kaur R, Bhardwaj P, et al.. Hydroxychloroquine as therapeutic option in COVID- 19: analysis of suspected cardiovascular adverse drug events reported in the VigiBase. Bangladesh J Med Sci. 2021, 6:897-910. 10.3329/bjms.v20i4.54150 · DOI
  7. Samad N, Dutta S, Sodunke TE, et al.. Fat-soluble vitamins and the current global pandemic of COVID-19: evidence-based efficacy from literature review. J Inflamm Res. 2021, 19:2091-110. 10.2147/JIR.S307333 · DOI
  8. Samad N, Sodunke TE, Abubakar AR, et al.. The implications of zinc therapy in combating the COVID-19 global pandemic. J Inflamm Res. 2021, 14:527-50. 10.2147/JIR.S295377 · DOI
  9. Kaur RJ, Charan J, Dutta S, et al.. Favipiravir use in COVID-19: analysis of suspected adverse drug events reported in the WHO database. Infect Drug Resist. 2020, 13:4427-38. 10.2147/IDR.S287934 · DOI
  10. Charan J, Kaur RJ, Bhardwaj P, Haque M, Sharma P, Misra S, Godman B. Rapid review of suspected adverse drug events due to remdesivir in the WHO database; findings and implications. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2021, 14:95-103. 10.1080/17512433.2021.1856655 · DOI
  11. Hossen MS, Barek MA, Jahan N, Safiqul Islam M. A review on current repurposing drugs for the treatment of COVID-19: reality and challenges. SN Compr Clin Med. 2020, 1-13. 10.1007/s42399-020-00485-9 · DOI
  12. Kaur RJ, Dutta S, Bhardwaj P, et al.. Adverse events reported from COVID-19 vaccine trials: a systematic review. Indian J Clin Biochem. 2021, 1-13. 10.1007/s12291-021-00968-z · DOI
  13. Logunov DY, Dolzhikova IV, Shcheblyakov DV, et al.. Safety and efficacy of an rAd26 and rAd5 vector-based heterologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccine: an interim analysis of a randomised controlled phase 3 trial in Russia. Lancet. 2021, 397:671-81. 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00234-8 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Kim DD, Kung CS, Perez DL. Helping the public understand adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccinations: lessons learned from functional neurological disorder. JAMA Neurol. 2021, 78:789-90. 10.1001/jamaneurol.2021.1042 · DOI
  15. Lu L, Xiong W, Mu J, et al.. The potential neurological effect of the COVID-19 vaccines: a review. Acta Neurol Scand. 2021, 144:3-12. 10.1111/ane.13417 · DOI
  16. Dutta S, Kaur R, Bhardwaj P, et al.. Adverse events reported from the COVID-19 vaccines: a descriptive study based on the WHO database (VigiBase®). J Appl Pharm Sci. 2021, 11:1-9. 10.7324/JAPS.2021.110801 · DOI
  17. Jeet Kaur R, Dutta S, Charan J, et al.. Cardiovascular adverse events reported from COVID-19 vaccines: a study based on WHO database. Int J Gen Med. 2021, 14:3909-27. 10.2147/IJGM.S324349 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Brown EG, Wood L, Wood S. The medical dictionary for regulatory activities (MedDRA). Drug Saf. 1999, 20:109-17. 10.2165/00002018-199920020-00002 · DOI
  19. Bate A, Lindquist M, Edwards IR, Olsson S, Orre R, Lansner A, De Freitas RM. A Bayesian neural network method for adverse drug reaction signal generation. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1998, 54:315-21. 10.1007/s002280050466 · DOI
  20. Montastruc JL, Sommet A, Bagheri H, Lapeyre-Mestre M. Benefits and strengths of the disproportionality analysis for identification of adverse drug reactions in a pharmacovigilance database. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2011, 72:905-8. 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2011.04037.x · DOI
  21. Li C, Xia J, Deng J, Jiang J. A comparison of measures of disproportionality for signal detection on adverse drug reaction spontaneous reporting database of Guangdong province in China. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2008, 17:593-600. 10.1002/pds.1601 · DOI
  22. Harpaz R, DuMouchel W, Shah NH, Madigan D, Ryan P, Friedman C. Novel data-mining methodologies for adverse drug event discovery and analysis. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012, 91:1010-21. 10.1038/clpt.2012.50 · DOI
  23. Bate A, Evans SJ. Quantitative signal detection using spontaneous ADR reporting. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2009, 18:427-36. 10.1002/pds.1742 · DOI
  24. Meo SA, Bukhari IA, Akram J, Meo AS, Klonoff DC. COVID-19 vaccines: comparison of biological, pharmacological characteristics and adverse effects of Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2021, 25:1663-9. 10.26355/eurrev_202102_24877 · DOI
  25. Cocores A, Monteith T. Post-vaccination headache reporting trends according to the vaccine adverse events reporting system (VAERS) (P1.147). Neurology. 2016, 86:1-147. · DOI
  26. Ramasamy MN, Minassian AM, Ewer KJ, et al.. Safety and immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine administered in a prime-boost regimen in young and old adults (COV002): a single-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial. Lancet. 2021, 396:1979-93. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32466-1 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Hervé C, Laupèze B, Del Giudice G, Didierlaurent AM, Da Silva FT. The how's and what's of vaccine reactogenicity. NPJ Vaccines. 2019, 4:39. 10.1038/s41541-019-0132-6 · DOI
  28. Burny W, Callegaro A, Bechtold V, et al.. Different adjuvants induce common innate pathways that are associated with enhanced adaptive responses against a model antigen in humans. Front Immunol. 2017, 8:943. 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00943 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Dutta, S., Kaur, R., Charan, J., Bhardwaj, P., Ambwani, S. R., Babu, S., Goyal, J. P., & Haque, M.
Affiliations
All India Institute of Medical Sciences Jodhpur (IN)
Corresponding author
Charan, Jaykaran
Venue
Cureus
Published
2022-01-18
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
e21376-e21376
ISSN
2168-8184 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4206187848
Cited by
36
References
5
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10
FWCI
6.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Cureus (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
Keywords
COVID-19 vaccines, neurological adverse events, BNT162b2, AZD1222, mRNA-1273, Vero cell vaccine, Covaxin, pharmacovigilance, VigiBase, disproportionality analysis, dizziness, headache, seizures, parosmia, facial paralysis

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