Dataset Information

COVID-19 vaccinations are associated with reduced fatality rates: Evidence from cross-county quasi-experiments.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Scientists have demonstrated the efficacy of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in randomized controlled trials. However, the extent to which reductions in COVID-19 case fatality ratio (CFR) are attributable to mass vaccination in the real world remains unclear. This study evaluated the association of COVID-19 vaccine coverage with CFR on a global scale.

Methods

The sample was a longitudinal data set of 90 countries over 25 weeks, from the first week of November 2020 to the third week of April 2021. CFR was measured in deaths per 100 COVID-19 confirmed cases; vaccine coverage was defined as the number of people who received at least one vaccine dose per 10 people in the total population. Data were retrieved from open-access databases, including Our World in Data and the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. A country-level random effects model was used; a comprehensive set of variables for country characteristics and nonpharmaceutical interventions were included.

Results

A 10% increase in vaccine coverage was associated with a 7.6% reduction in the CFR (95% confidence interval (CI = -12.6 to -2.7%, P = 0.002). This association was stronger in countries with more effective governments (-8.3%; 95% CI = -13.6 to -3.1%, P = 0.002) and higher transport infrastructure quality (-8.1%; 95% CI = -13.3 to -2.9%, P = 0.002). Moreover, the vaccine coverage was associated with a reduced CFR in a dose-dependent manner. When vaccine coverage achieved 0.8 to 1.6, 1.6 to 3.2 and ≥3.2 per 10 people, the CFR reduced by 12.7% (95 CI = -21.8 to -3.6%, P = 0.006), 21.2% (95 CI = -33.9 to -8.5%, P = 0.001) and 31.3% (95 CI = -51.5 to -11.0%, P = 0.002), respectively as compared with no vaccination.

Conclusions

Our results provide supporting evidence that vaccination is critical to preventing deaths among infected people. Vaccination programmes have yielded significant health benefits in certain countries. However, globally, a large gap remains between observed and achievable fatality reductions. Continuous improvement in vaccine coverage will be critical to transforming efficacious vaccines into desired health outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Liang LL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8285768 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSocial vulnerability indices were created to measure resiliency to environmental disasters based on socioeconomic and population characteristics of discrete geographic regions. They are composed of multiple validated constructs that can also potentially identify geographically vulnerable populations after injury. Our objective was to determine if these indices correlate with injury fatality rates in the US.MethodsWe evaluated three social vulnerability indices: The Hazards & Vulnerability Research Institute's Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI), the Center for Disease Control's Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), and the Economic Innovation Group's Distressed Community Index (DCI). We analyzed SVI subindices and common individual census variables as indicators of socioeconomic status. Outcomes included age-adjusted county-level overall, firearm, and motor vehicle collision deaths per 100,000 population. Linear regression determined the association of injury fatality rates with the SoVI, SVI, and DCI. Bivariate choropleth mapping identified geographic variation and spatial autocorrelation of overall fatality, SoVI, and DCI.ResultsA total of 3,137 US counties were included. Only 24.6% of counties fell into the same vulnerability quintile for all three indices. Despite this, all indices were associated with increasing fatality rates for overall, firearm, and motor vehicle collision fatality. The DCI performed best by model fit, explanation of variance, and diagnostic performance on overall injury fatality. There is significant geographic variation in SoVI, DCI, and injury fatality rates at the county level across the United States, with moderate spatial autocorrelation of SoVI (Moran's I, 0.35; p < 0.01) and high autocorrelation of injury fatality rates (Moran's I, 0.77; p < 0.01) and DCI (Moran's I, 0.53; p < 0.01).ConclusionWhile the indices contribute unique information, higher social vulnerability is associated with higher injury fatality across all indices. These indices may be useful in the epidemiologic and geographic assessment of injury-related fatality rates. Further study is warranted to determine if these indices outperform traditional measures of socioeconomic status and related constructs used in trauma research.Level of evidenceEpidemiological, level IV.

Project description:ObjectivesTo estimate age-specific and sex-specific mortality risk among all SARS-CoV-2 infections in four settings in India, a major lower-middle-income country and to compare age trends in mortality with similar estimates in high-income countries.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingIndia, multiple regions representing combined population >150 million.ParticipantsAggregate infection counts were drawn from four large population-representative prevalence/seroprevalence surveys. Data on corresponding number of deaths were drawn from official government reports of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 deaths.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was age-specific and sex-specific infection fatality rate (IFR), estimated as the number of confirmed deaths per infection. The secondary outcome was the slope of the IFR-by-age function, representing increased risk associated with age.ResultsAmong males aged 50-89, measured IFR was 0.12% in Karnataka (95% CI 0.09% to 0.15%), 0.42% in Tamil Nadu (95% CI 0.39% to 0.45%), 0.53% in Mumbai (95% CI 0.52% to 0.54%) and an imprecise 5.64% (95% CI 0% to 11.16%) among migrants returning to Bihar. Estimated IFR was approximately twice as high for males as for females, heterogeneous across contexts and rose less dramatically at older ages compared with similar studies in high-income countries.ConclusionsEstimated age-specific IFRs during the first wave varied substantially across India. While estimated IFRs in Mumbai, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu were considerably lower than comparable estimates from high-income countries, adjustment for under-reporting based on crude estimates of excess mortality puts them almost exactly equal with higher-income country benchmarks. In a marginalised migrant population, estimated IFRs were much higher than in other contexts around the world. Estimated IFRs suggest that the elderly in India are at an advantage relative to peers in high-income countries. Our findings suggest that the standard estimation approach may substantially underestimate IFR in low-income settings due to under-reporting of COVID-19 deaths, and that COVID-19 IFRs may be similar in low-income and high-income settings.