Skip to content
COVID-19 / SPECIALTY RESEARCH

VaccinologyIn perspective.

The key COVID-19 findings in vaccinology, distilled into a clear, readable brief. The evidence is here whenever you want to go deeper.

INSIDE THIS MONITOR
48cited sources
59available findings

Study findings updated

AI-assisted evidence summary. For general information. These findings are not individual medical advice or a clinician endorsement.

THE SHORT VERSION

What’s worth knowing.

The key findings, what they mean, and the context that matters.

THE HEADLINE TAKEAWAY

Omicron-adapted vaccines: severe-outcome benefits and a myocarditis signal

Versus no Omicron-adapted vaccination, reported effectiveness ranged 16.6% to 67.8% for COVID-19 hospitalization and 26.6% to 75.2% for all-cause mortality. A myocarditis incidence signal was also reported.

Rapid review of adults who were neither pregnant nor immunocompromised. The myocarditis signal involved adults aged 50 years or older. Its uncertainty range was wide and included no increase; its reference group and absolute rate are unavailable here.

See the evidence

Vaccine effectiveness for COVID-19-related hospitalization with Omicron-adapted vaccination vs. no Omicron-adapted vaccination

16.6% to 67.8%
95% CI, 6.5% to 25.8% and 95% CI, 63.1% to 72.5%

Dobrescu, Andreea et al.. Effectiveness, Comparative Effectiveness, and Harms of COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults Who Are Not Pregnant or Immunocompromised: A Rapid Review for the American College of Physicians.. Annals of internal medicine. 2026.

Vaccine effectiveness for all-cause mortality with Omicron-adapted vaccination vs. no Omicron-adapted vaccination

26.6% to 75.2%
95% CI, 5.5% to 42.3% and 95% CI, 70.6% to 79.9%

Dobrescu, Andreea et al.. Effectiveness, Comparative Effectiveness, and Harms of COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults Who Are Not Pregnant or Immunocompromised: A Rapid Review for the American College of Physicians.. Annals of internal medicine. 2026.

Myocarditis risk increase with Omicron-adapted vaccination in adults aged 50 years or older

IRR 2.7
95% CI, 1.0 to 7.0

Dobrescu, Andreea et al.. Effectiveness, Comparative Effectiveness, and Harms of COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults Who Are Not Pregnant or Immunocompromised: A Rapid Review for the American College of Physicians.. Annals of internal medicine. 2026.

02

Vaccination helped, yet immunosuppressed adults had higher residual risk

Among adults on included immunosuppressive therapies, pooled vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization versus no vaccination was 88.4%. Hospitalization risk was still higher than in vaccinated healthy adults.

This systematic review and meta-analysis excluded organ transplant recipients. Heterogeneity was high in both hospitalization comparisons, limiting how uniformly the estimates apply.

See the evidence

Pooled vaccine effectiveness versus no vaccination against hospitalisation among adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies; organ transplant recipients were excluded and heterogeneity was high (I²=73.9%).

88.4%
95% CI: 82.8%-92.3%

Stadler, Eva et al.. COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in people on immunosuppressive therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. The Lancet. Microbe. 2026.

Added

Risk of hospitalisation among vaccinated adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies compared with vaccinated healthy individuals; heterogeneity was high (I²=85.5%).

RR 3.72
95% CI: 1.63-8.47

Stadler, Eva et al.. COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in people on immunosuppressive therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. The Lancet. Microbe. 2026.

Added

03

Patients with at least two doses had lower Long COVID risk

16%lower relative risk

Patients receiving at least two vaccine doses had 16% lower relative risk of Long COVID than patients receiving zero doses.

This is an adjusted relative-risk association, not an absolute percentage-point reduction. The dose-count result does not state vaccination timing relative to acute COVID-19 in this summary.

See the evidence

16% lower relative risk, calculated from aRR 0.84. This is not an absolute percentage-point difference.

Long COVID risk among vaccinated patients receiving at least two doses versus unvaccinated patients receiving zero doses

aRR 0.84
0.81-0.88

Butzin-Dozier, Zachary et al.. COVID-19 vaccination timing, relative to acute COVID-19, and subsequent risk of long COVID.. EBioMedicine. 2026.

Added

04

Later JN.1 hospitalization protection was not established

At 2 to <30 weeks after a BNT162b2 XBB:1.5-adapted dose, effectiveness against JN.1 hospitalization was supported; at 30 to <46 weeks, the estimate did not establish effectiveness.

European test-negative case-control study. The vaccine-effectiveness reference group is not available in this summary, so percentages are omitted. At 30 to <46 weeks, the reported confidence interval included no vaccine effectiveness; this does not prove protection was absent.

See the evidence

Vaccine effectiveness against JN.1-related hospitalization at 30 to <46 weeks since dose

4.9%
95% CI: -30.3; 30.7

Volkman, Hannah R et al.. Durability of the BNT162b2 XBB:1.5-adapted vaccine against JN.1 hospitalisation in Europe, October 2023 to August 2024: A test-negative case-control study using the id.DRIVE platform.. PloS one. 2026.

Vaccine effectiveness against JN.1-related hospitalization at 2 to <30 weeks since dose

64.5%
95% CI: 56.6; 71.0

Volkman, Hannah R et al.. Durability of the BNT162b2 XBB:1.5-adapted vaccine against JN.1 hospitalisation in Europe, October 2023 to August 2024: A test-negative case-control study using the id.DRIVE platform.. PloS one. 2026.

05

Observational effectiveness estimates often had serious bias concerns

78% (1591 results)

A living review judged 78% of 1591 observational vaccine-effectiveness results during Omicron predominance at serious risk of bias, mainly from other differences between groups. Swedish findings separately suggested health-related differences in who received vaccination.

The Swedish analysis concerned adults aged 65 years or older and 2024-2025 JN.1-adapted COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization; it was a bias signal, not a corrected estimate.

See the evidence

Serious risk of bias among observational estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness during Omicron predominance; the principal concern was confounding

78% (1591 results)

Kazi, Fatema et al.. Implications for future pandemics from a living systematic review and critical evaluation of observational studies of the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination against the Omicron variant.. Vaccine. 2026.

Added

Reported observational effectiveness of the 2024-2025 JN.1-adapted COVID-19 vaccine against COVID-19-related hospitalization among Swedish adults aged 65 years or older; the study's negative-control results suggest this estimate may be affected by healthy-vaccinee selection.

75%
95% CI: 70%-79%

Lyth, Johan et al.. Healthy vaccinee effect in the evaluation of updated COVID-19 vaccines in elderly populations.. Nature communications. 2026.

Added

Study-specific findings. Different populations, treatments and follow-up periods can produce different results.

THE RESEARCH, AS IT ARRIVES

Latest studies.

The newest findings added to this collection.
The learning from each, already distilled.

  1. STUDY 01Findings added
    TL;DR

    Vaccination helped, but immunosuppressed adults had higher risks

    Among adults on included immunosuppressive therapies, pooled hospitalization effectiveness versus no vaccination was 88.4%. Versus vaccinated healthy adults, vaccinated patients had higher infection, hospitalization and death risks.

    The systematic review and meta-analysis excluded organ transplant recipients, and heterogeneity was high for all comparisons summarized here.

    Study details & original results

    Stadler, Eva et al.. COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in people on immunosuppressive therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. The Lancet. Microbe. 2026.

    Pooled vaccine effectiveness versus no vaccination against hospitalisation among adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies; organ transplant recipients were excluded and heterogeneity was high (I²=73.9%).

    88.4%
    95% CI: 82.8%-92.3%

    Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies compared with vaccinated healthy individuals; heterogeneity was high (I²=89.7%).

    RR 1.57
    95% CI: 1.25-1.96

    Risk of hospitalisation among vaccinated adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies compared with vaccinated healthy individuals; heterogeneity was high (I²=85.5%).

    RR 3.72
    95% CI: 1.63-8.47

    Risk of death among vaccinated adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies compared with vaccinated healthy individuals; heterogeneity was high (I²=75.2%).

    RR 3.14
    95% CI: 1.51-6.54

    Citation in Vaccinology
  2. STUDY 02Findings added
    TL;DR

    Higher antibodies tracked with less progression to severe COVID-19

    Each 10-fold increase in vaccine-induced neutralising antibody titres was associated with lower risk of progressing from SARS-CoV-2 infection to hospital admission or intensive care.

    Antibody titres and clinical outcomes were measured in different studies, and unmeasured confounding was possible. The association does not establish that raising titres itself changes clinical outcomes.

    Study details & original results

    Elias, Karen M et al.. Neutralising antibodies and protection from progression to severe COVID-19: A meta-analysis.. PLoS medicine. 2026.

    Association between vaccine-induced neutralising antibody titres and progression from SARS-CoV-2 infection to severe COVID-19 (hospital or ICU admission); p<0.001. Neutralisation titres and clinical outcomes were measured in different studies, with possible unmeasured confounding.

    RR 0.57 per 10-fold increase in GMT
    95% CI: 0.51-0.64

    Citation in Vaccinology
  3. STUDY 03Findings added
    TL;DR

    Many Omicron effectiveness results had serious bias concerns

    78% (1591 results)

    The living review judged 78% of 1591 observational COVID-19 vaccine-effectiveness results during Omicron predominance at serious risk of bias, mainly because other differences between groups could affect the estimates.

    This evaluates the reliability of observational estimates rather than measuring a single clinical benefit or harm.

    Study details & original results

    Kazi, Fatema et al.. Implications for future pandemics from a living systematic review and critical evaluation of observational studies of the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination against the Omicron variant.. Vaccine. 2026.

    Serious risk of bias among observational estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness during Omicron predominance; the principal concern was confounding

    78% (1591 results)

    Citation in Vaccinology
  4. STUDY 04Findings added
    TL;DR

    No clear infection-effectiveness difference between KP.3.1.1 and XEC

    No clear difference

    A direct comparison found no clear difference between JN.1 vaccine effectiveness against KP.3.1.1 infection and against XEC infection.

    Power was low; the direct-comparison interval included no difference and did not prove equal effectiveness. Over the 5-month low-incidence period, effectiveness was supported in those aged 60 years or older. For eligible younger participants with a medical risk condition or who were healthcare workers, the interval included no vaccine effectiveness; reference groups are unavailable.

    Study details & original results

    Huiberts, Anne J et al.. Effectiveness of Omicron JN.1 vaccination against infection with JN.1-derived SARS-CoV-2 subvariants in a prospective cohort study in the Netherlands.. Vaccine. 2026.

    Direct comparison of variant-specific effectiveness against KP.3.1.1 infection (VE 27%; n=251) and XEC infection (VE 5%; n=195). The difference was not statistically significant, and the abstract states that power to detect a difference was low.

    OR 1.3
    0.8-2.1

    JN.1 vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection among participants aged 60 years or older during the 5-month low-incidence study period.

    13%
    95% CI: 2% to 23%

    JN.1 vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccine-eligible participants younger than 60 years, who had a medical risk condition or were healthcare workers, during the 5-month low-incidence study period; the confidence interval included no effectiveness.

    16%
    95% CI: -11% to 36%

    The reported result does not establish a difference; it does not prove equivalence.

    Citation in Vaccinology
4 of 11 study updates

Dates show when findings were added here, not when papers were published. Study populations and comparisons differ.

WHEN YOU WANT TO GO DEEPER
See all 59 findingsOriginal results, comparisons and study details.
22 of 22 source groupsFindings stay together with their study.
SOURCE 485 findings

Stadler, Eva et al.. COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in people on immunosuppressive therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. The Lancet. Microbe. 2026.

Vaccine effectiveness versus no vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection with pre-Omicron variants after three vaccinations among adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies; organ transplant recipients were excluded and heterogeneity was high (I²=96.8%).

Added
82.3%95% CI: 72.4%-88.7%Source [48]

Pooled vaccine effectiveness versus no vaccination against hospitalisation among adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies; organ transplant recipients were excluded and heterogeneity was high (I²=73.9%).

Added
88.4%95% CI: 82.8%-92.3%Source [48]
All 5 findings from this source

Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies compared with vaccinated healthy individuals; heterogeneity was high (I²=89.7%).

Added
RR 1.5795% CI: 1.25-1.96Source [48]

Risk of hospitalisation among vaccinated adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies compared with vaccinated healthy individuals; heterogeneity was high (I²=85.5%).

Added
RR 3.7295% CI: 1.63-8.47Source [48]

Risk of death among vaccinated adults receiving included immunosuppressive therapies compared with vaccinated healthy individuals; heterogeneity was high (I²=75.2%).

Added
RR 3.1495% CI: 1.51-6.54Source [48]
SOURCE 471 finding

Elias, Karen M et al.. Neutralising antibodies and protection from progression to severe COVID-19: A meta-analysis.. PLoS medicine. 2026.

Association between vaccine-induced neutralising antibody titres and progression from SARS-CoV-2 infection to severe COVID-19 (hospital or ICU admission); p<0.001. Neutralisation titres and clinical outcomes were measured in different studies, with possible unmeasured confounding.

Added
RR 0.57 per 10-fold increase in GMT95% CI: 0.51-0.64Source [47]
SOURCE 461 finding

Kazi, Fatema et al.. Implications for future pandemics from a living systematic review and critical evaluation of observational studies of the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination against the Omicron variant.. Vaccine. 2026.

Serious risk of bias among observational estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness during Omicron predominance; the principal concern was confounding

Added
78% (1591 results)Source [46]
SOURCE 453 findings

Huiberts, Anne J et al.. Effectiveness of Omicron JN.1 vaccination against infection with JN.1-derived SARS-CoV-2 subvariants in a prospective cohort study in the Netherlands.. Vaccine. 2026.

JN.1 vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccine-eligible participants younger than 60 years, who had a medical risk condition or were healthcare workers, during the 5-month low-incidence study period; the confidence interval included no effectiveness.

Added
16%95% CI: -11% to 36%Source [45]

JN.1 vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection among participants aged 60 years or older during the 5-month low-incidence study period.

Added
13%95% CI: 2% to 23%Source [45]
All 3 findings from this source

Direct comparison of variant-specific effectiveness against KP.3.1.1 infection (VE 27%; n=251) and XEC infection (VE 5%; n=195). The difference was not statistically significant, and the abstract states that power to detect a difference was low.

Added
OR 1.30.8-2.1Source [45]
SOURCE 441 finding

Lyth, Johan et al.. Healthy vaccinee effect in the evaluation of updated COVID-19 vaccines in elderly populations.. Nature communications. 2026.

Reported observational effectiveness of the 2024-2025 JN.1-adapted COVID-19 vaccine against COVID-19-related hospitalization among Swedish adults aged 65 years or older; the study's negative-control results suggest this estimate may be affected by healthy-vaccinee selection.

Added
75%95% CI: 70%-79%Source [44]
SOURCE 431 finding

SeyedAlinaghi, SeyedAhmad et al.. Risk Factors of the Spread of COVID-19 in Prisoners: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. Disaster medicine and public health preparedness. 2026.

COVID-19 infection risk among fully vaccinated prisoners compared with unvaccinated prisoners; the risk-factor meta-analysis included 5 articles

Added
OR 0.3895% CI: 0.22-0.67Source [43]
SOURCE 421 finding

Tharmaraj, Dhakshayini et al.. Critical role of vaccination in preventing severe coronavirus disease 2019: perspectives from clinical outcomes in an Australian kidney transplant recipient cohort.. Internal medicine journal. 2026.

Association of each additional vaccine dose with severe COVID-19 requiring hospitalization among kidney transplant recipients during the Delta and Omicron BA.1/BA.2 waves

Added
aHR 0.50 per additional vaccine dose95% CI: 0.40-0.65Source [42]
SOURCE 414 findings

de Padua, Marina Coelho et al.. Effectiveness of BNT162B2 and CoronaVac vaccines in reducing COVID-19 severity among children aged 3-4 years in Brazil.. Vaccine. 2026.

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization after 1 dose among children aged 3 to 4 years in Brazil during the Omicron period; vaccination was predominantly with CoronaVac, and direct comparison with BNT162b2 was not feasible because of the lower proportion of BNT162b2 recipients.

Added
79.0%95% CI: 69.9%-85.4%Source [41]

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization after completion of the 2-dose primary series among children aged 3 to 4 years in Brazil during the Omicron period; vaccination was predominantly with CoronaVac, and direct comparison with BNT162b2 was not feasible because of the lower proportion of BNT162b2 recipients.

Added
49.2%95% CI: 32.5%-61.9%Source [41]
All 4 findings from this source

Vaccine effectiveness against invasive mechanical ventilation after 1 dose among children aged 3 to 4 years in Brazil during the Omicron period; vaccination was predominantly with CoronaVac, and direct comparison with BNT162b2 was not feasible because of the lower proportion of BNT162b2 recipients.

Added

Vaccine effectiveness against invasive mechanical ventilation after completion of the 2-dose primary series among children aged 3 to 4 years in Brazil during the Omicron period; vaccination was predominantly with CoronaVac, and direct comparison with BNT162b2 was not feasible because of the lower proportion of BNT162b2 recipients.

Added
SOURCE 402 findings

Blake, Alexandre et al.. Adapted XBB.1.5 vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19 outcomes among immunocompromised persons in 2023-24 in six European countries: a VEBIS-EHR network study.. Expert review of vaccines. 2026.

XBB.1.5 vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization 14-59 days after vaccination among immunocompromised adults

Added
52%95% CI: 41%-60%Source [40]

XBB.1.5 vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 death 14-59 days after vaccination among immunocompromised adults

Added
75%95% CI: 60%-84%Source [40]
SOURCE 392 findings

Fitz-Patrick, David et al.. Immunogenicity, Tolerability, and Safety of BA.1-Adapted BNT162b2 Vaccine in 18- to 55-Year-Olds Previously Vaccinated with BNT162b2 or Who Were COVID-19 Vaccine-Naive.. Infectious diseases and therapy. 2026.

Omicron BA.1 neutralizing titers one month after one BNT162b2-BA.1 dose versus one original BNT162b2 dose in previously vaccinated adults aged 18 to 55 years

Added
GMR 2.87Source [39]

Omicron BA.1 neutralizing titers one month after two BNT162b2-BA.1 doses versus one original BNT162b2 dose in previously vaccinated adults aged 18 to 55 years

Added
GMR 2.64Source [39]
SOURCE 382 findings

Butzin-Dozier, Zachary et al.. COVID-19 vaccination timing, relative to acute COVID-19, and subsequent risk of long COVID.. EBioMedicine. 2026.

Long COVID risk among vaccinated patients receiving at least two doses versus unvaccinated patients receiving zero doses

Added
aRR 0.840.81-0.88Source [38]

Mortality risk among vaccinated patients receiving at least two doses versus unvaccinated patients receiving zero doses

Added
aRR 0.830.81-0.86Source [38]
SOURCE 121 finding

Dan JM, et al. Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 assessed for up to 8 months after infection. Science. 2021;371(6529):eabf4063.

Original source link unavailableView citation [12]

Memory B Cell Persistence

>24moSustained immune memorySource [12]
SOURCE 161 finding

Tartof SY, et al. Effectiveness of mRNA BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine up to 6 months in a large integrated health system in the USA. Lancet. 2021;398(10309):1407-1416.

Original source link unavailableView citation [16]

Hospitalization (Boosted)

-85%HR 0.15 (95% CI: 0.08-0.25)Source [16]
SOURCE 231 finding

Bobrovitz N, et al. Protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against the omicron variant. Lancet Infect Dis. 2023;23(5):556-567.

Original source link unavailableView citation [23]

Hybrid Immunity Protection

2-3xvs vaccination aloneSource [23]
SOURCE 315 findings

Ma, Kevin C et al. Estimated Effectiveness of 2024-2025 COVID-19 Vaccination Against Severe COVID-19. JAMA Network Open. 2026.

2024-25 VE Against Hospitalization

40%95% CI, 27%-51%Source [31]

VE Against Ventilation/Death

79%95% CI, 55%-92%Source [31]
All 5 findings from this source

VE vs KP.3.1.1 Lineage

49%95% CI, 25%-67%Source [31]

VE vs XEC Lineage

34%95% CI, 4%-56%Source [31]

VE vs LP.8.1 Lineage

24%95% CI, -19% to 53%Source [31]
SOURCE 328 findings

Volkman, Hannah R et al.. Durability of the BNT162b2 XBB:1.5-adapted vaccine against JN.1 hospitalisation in Europe, October 2023 to August 2024: A test-negative case-control study using the id.DRIVE platform.. PloS one. 2026.

Vaccine effectiveness against JN.1-related hospitalization at 2 to <30 weeks since dose

64.5%95% CI: 56.6; 71.0Source [32]

Vaccine effectiveness against JN.1-related hospitalization at 30 to <46 weeks since dose

4.9%95% CI: -30.3; 30.7Source [32]
All 8 findings from this source

Vaccine effectiveness against JN.1-related hospitalization at 2 to <30 weeks post-dose

64.5%95% CI: 56.6-71.0Source [32]

Vaccine effectiveness against JN.1-related hospitalization at 30 to <46 weeks post-dose

4.9%95% CI: -30.3-30.7Source [32]

Vaccine effectiveness against JN.1-related hospitalization at 2 to <30 weeks since dose

64.5%95% CI: 56.6-71.0Source [32]

Vaccine effectiveness against JN.1-related hospitalization at 30 to <46 weeks since dose

4.9%95% CI: -30.3-30.7Source [32]

Vaccine effectiveness against JN.1-related hospitalization at 2 to <30 weeks post-dose

64.5%95% CI: 56.6-71.0Source [32]

Vaccine effectiveness against JN.1-related hospitalization at 30 to <46 weeks post-dose

4.9%95% CI: -30.3-30.7Source [32]
SOURCE 336 findings

Barboza, Ana Paula Bandeira et al.. Protective effect of a second booster dose against long COVID among individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 in southeastern Brazil.. Vaccine. 2026.

Long COVID risk reduction with two booster doses vs. primary series

OR 0.1895% CI: 0.07-0.46Source [33]

Long COVID risk reduction with second booster dose during Omicron period vs. primary series

OR 0.5095% CI: 0.34-0.74Source [33]
All 6 findings from this source

Two booster doses reduced long COVID risk by 82% compared to primary vaccine series

OR 0.1895% CI 0.07-0.46Source [33]

Second booster dose reduced long COVID risk by 50% during Omicron period compared to complete primary series

OR 0.5095% CI 0.34-0.74Source [33]

Two booster doses reduced long COVID risk compared to primary series

OR 0.1895% CI 0.07-0.46Source [33]

Second booster dose during Omicron period vs complete primary series

OR 0.50CI 0.34-0.74Source [33]
SOURCE 342 findings

Qian, Jiahui et al.. New-onset diabetes following SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Omicron era: a matched cohort study.. International journal of epidemiology. 2026.

Overall diabetes risk after COVID-19 vs no COVID-19

aHR 1.1495% CI: 1.12-1.17Source [34]

Diabetes risk for those with ≤2 vaccine doses

aHR 1.2295% CI: 1.18-1.25Source [34]
SOURCE 355 findings

Dobrescu, Andreea et al.. Effectiveness, Comparative Effectiveness, and Harms of COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults Who Are Not Pregnant or Immunocompromised: A Rapid Review for the American College of Physicians.. Annals of internal medicine. 2026.

Vaccine effectiveness for all-cause mortality with Omicron-adapted vaccination vs. no Omicron-adapted vaccination

26.6% to 75.2%95% CI, 5.5% to 42.3% and 95% CI, 70.6% to 79.9%Source [35]

Vaccine effectiveness for COVID-19-related hospitalization with Omicron-adapted vaccination vs. no Omicron-adapted vaccination

16.6% to 67.8%95% CI, 6.5% to 25.8% and 95% CI, 63.1% to 72.5%Source [35]
All 5 findings from this source

Vaccine effectiveness for all-cause mortality when Omicron-adapted vaccine given >365 days after prior vaccine

36.1%95% CI, 14.8% to 54.1%Source [35]

Vaccine effectiveness for COVID-19-related hospitalization when Omicron-adapted vaccine given >365 days after prior vaccine

22.2%95% CI, 11.4% to 32.0%Source [35]

Myocarditis risk increase with Omicron-adapted vaccination in adults aged 50 years or older

IRR 2.795% CI, 1.0 to 7.0Source [35]
SOURCE 364 findings

Wiegand, Ryan E et al.. Interim Estimated Effectiveness of 2025-2026 COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults Using a Test-Negative Design.. JAMA network open. 2026.

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters with 2025-2026 COVID-19 vaccine

50%95% CI, 42%-57%Source [36]

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-associated hospitalization with 2025-2026 COVID-19 vaccine

55%95% CI, 41%-66%Source [36]
All 4 findings from this source

Vaccine effectiveness against ED/UC encounters in adults aged 65+ years

48%95% CI, 37%-56%Source [36]

Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization in adults aged 65+ years

53%95% CI, 37%-65%Source [36]
SOURCE 372 findings

Benist, Sara C et al.. Recent COVID-19 Vaccination and Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission.. JAMA network open. 2026.

Reduced household transmission when primary case vaccinated ≤6 months prior

ARR 0.5795% CI: 0.35-0.93Source [37]

Overall secondary infection risk among household contacts

62.4%95% CI, 58.7%-65.5%Source [37]
Browse the 48 original sourcesThe complete bibliography behind this monitor.
  1. [1]

    Byambasuren O, et al. Effect of covid-19 vaccination on long covid: systematic review. BMJ Medicine. 2023;2(1):e000385.

    Open original source in a new tab
  2. [2]

    Notarte KI, et al. Impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the risk of developing long-COVID and on existing long-COVID symptoms: A systematic review. EClinicalMedicine. 2022;53:101624.

    Open original source in a new tab
  3. [3]

    Watanabe A, et al. Protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination against long COVID syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Vaccine. 2023;41(11):1783-1790.

    Original source link unavailable
  4. [4]

    Marra AR, et al. Risk of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 in vaccinated populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Infection. 2023;86(6):589-603.

    Original source link unavailable
  5. [5]

    Polack FP, et al. Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(27):2603-2615.

    Open original source in a new tab
  6. [6]

    Baden LR, et al. Efficacy and Safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(5):403-416.

    Open original source in a new tab
  7. [7]

    Thomas SJ, et al. Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine through 6 Months. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(19):1761-1773.

    Original source link unavailable
  8. [8]

    Al-Aly Z, et al. Long COVID after breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nature Medicine. 2022;28(7):1461-1467.

    Open original source in a new tab
  9. [9]

    Antonelli M, et al. Risk factors and disease profile of post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK users of the COVID Symptom Study app. Lancet Infect Dis. 2022;22(1):43-55.

    Original source link unavailable
  10. [10]

    Xie Y, et al. Association of Treatment With Nirmatrelvir and the Risk of Post-COVID-19 Condition. JAMA Intern Med. 2023;183(6):554-564.

    Original source link unavailable
  11. [11]

    Bowe B, et al. Acute and postacute sequelae associated with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Nature Medicine. 2022;28(11):2398-2405.

    Original source link unavailable
  12. [12]

    Dan JM, et al. Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 assessed for up to 8 months after infection. Science. 2021;371(6529):eabf4063.

    Original source link unavailable
  13. [13]

    Goel RR, et al. mRNA vaccines induce durable immune memory to SARS-CoV-2 and variants of concern. Science. 2021;374(6572):abm0829.

    Original source link unavailable
  14. [14]

    Wang Z, et al. Naturally enhanced neutralizing breadth against SARS-CoV-2 one year after infection. Nature. 2021;595(7867):426-431.

    Original source link unavailable
  15. [15]

    Sokal A, et al. mRNA vaccination of naive and COVID-19-recovered individuals elicits potent memory B cells that recognize SARS-CoV-2 variants. Immunity. 2021;54(12):2893-2907.

    Original source link unavailable
  16. [16]

    Tartof SY, et al. Effectiveness of mRNA BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine up to 6 months in a large integrated health system in the USA. Lancet. 2021;398(10309):1407-1416.

    Original source link unavailable
  17. [17]

    Chemaitelly H, et al. Duration of mRNA vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 subvariants in Qatar. Nature Communications. 2022;13(1):3082.

    Original source link unavailable
  18. [18]

    Lin DY, et al. Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines over a 9-Month Period in North Carolina. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(10):933-941.

    Original source link unavailable
  19. [19]

    Link-Gelles R, et al. Early Estimates of Bivalent mRNA Booster Dose Vaccine Effectiveness. MMWR. 2022;71(48):1526-1530.

    Original source link unavailable
  20. [20]

    Andrews N, et al. Covid-19 Vaccine Effectiveness against the Omicron (B.1.1.529) Variant. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(16):1532-1546.

    Original source link unavailable
  21. [21]

    Tseng HF, et al. Effectiveness of mRNA-1273 against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron and Delta variants. Nature Medicine. 2022;28(5):1063-1071.

    Original source link unavailable
  22. [22]

    Abu-Raddad LJ, et al. Effect of mRNA Vaccine Boosters against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Infection in Qatar. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(19):1804-1816.

    Original source link unavailable
  23. [23]

    Bobrovitz N, et al. Protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against the omicron variant. Lancet Infect Dis. 2023;23(5):556-567.

    Original source link unavailable
  24. [24]

    Altarawneh HN, et al. Protection by previous infection and vaccination against the Omicron variant. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(13):1288-1290.

    Original source link unavailable
  25. [25]

    Hall V, et al. Protection against SARS-CoV-2 after Covid-19 Vaccination and Previous Infection. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(13):1207-1220.

    Original source link unavailable
  26. [26]

    Davis HE, et al. Long COVID: major findings, mechanisms and recommendations. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2023;21(3):133-146.

    Original source link unavailable
  27. [27]

    Thaweethai T, et al. Development of a Definition of Postacute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection. JAMA. 2023;329(22):1934-1946.

    Original source link unavailable
  28. [28]

    Ballering AV, et al. Persistence of somatic symptoms after COVID-19 in the Netherlands. Lancet. 2022;400(10350):452-461.

    Original source link unavailable
  29. [29]

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Updates.

    Original source link unavailable
  30. [30]

    World Health Organization. COVID-19 vaccine tracker and landscape.

    Original source link unavailable
  31. [31]

    Ma, Kevin C et al. Estimated Effectiveness of 2024-2025 COVID-19 Vaccination Against Severe COVID-19. JAMA Network Open. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  32. [32]

    Volkman, Hannah R et al.. Durability of the BNT162b2 XBB:1.5-adapted vaccine against JN.1 hospitalisation in Europe, October 2023 to August 2024: A test-negative case-control study using the id.DRIVE platform.. PloS one. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  33. [33]

    Barboza, Ana Paula Bandeira et al.. Protective effect of a second booster dose against long COVID among individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 in southeastern Brazil.. Vaccine. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  34. [34]

    Qian, Jiahui et al.. New-onset diabetes following SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Omicron era: a matched cohort study.. International journal of epidemiology. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  35. [35]

    Dobrescu, Andreea et al.. Effectiveness, Comparative Effectiveness, and Harms of COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults Who Are Not Pregnant or Immunocompromised: A Rapid Review for the American College of Physicians.. Annals of internal medicine. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  36. [36]

    Wiegand, Ryan E et al.. Interim Estimated Effectiveness of 2025-2026 COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults Using a Test-Negative Design.. JAMA network open. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  37. [37]

    Benist, Sara C et al.. Recent COVID-19 Vaccination and Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission.. JAMA network open. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  38. [38]

    Butzin-Dozier, Zachary et al.. COVID-19 vaccination timing, relative to acute COVID-19, and subsequent risk of long COVID.. EBioMedicine. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  39. [39]

    Fitz-Patrick, David et al.. Immunogenicity, Tolerability, and Safety of BA.1-Adapted BNT162b2 Vaccine in 18- to 55-Year-Olds Previously Vaccinated with BNT162b2 or Who Were COVID-19 Vaccine-Naive.. Infectious diseases and therapy. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  40. [40]

    Blake, Alexandre et al.. Adapted XBB.1.5 vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19 outcomes among immunocompromised persons in 2023-24 in six European countries: a VEBIS-EHR network study.. Expert review of vaccines. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  41. [41]

    de Padua, Marina Coelho et al.. Effectiveness of BNT162B2 and CoronaVac vaccines in reducing COVID-19 severity among children aged 3-4 years in Brazil.. Vaccine. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  42. [42]

    Tharmaraj, Dhakshayini et al.. Critical role of vaccination in preventing severe coronavirus disease 2019: perspectives from clinical outcomes in an Australian kidney transplant recipient cohort.. Internal medicine journal. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  43. [43]

    SeyedAlinaghi, SeyedAhmad et al.. Risk Factors of the Spread of COVID-19 in Prisoners: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. Disaster medicine and public health preparedness. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  44. [44]

    Lyth, Johan et al.. Healthy vaccinee effect in the evaluation of updated COVID-19 vaccines in elderly populations.. Nature communications. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  45. [45]

    Huiberts, Anne J et al.. Effectiveness of Omicron JN.1 vaccination against infection with JN.1-derived SARS-CoV-2 subvariants in a prospective cohort study in the Netherlands.. Vaccine. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  46. [46]

    Kazi, Fatema et al.. Implications for future pandemics from a living systematic review and critical evaluation of observational studies of the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination against the Omicron variant.. Vaccine. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  47. [47]

    Elias, Karen M et al.. Neutralising antibodies and protection from progression to severe COVID-19: A meta-analysis.. PLoS medicine. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
  48. [48]

    Stadler, Eva et al.. COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in people on immunosuppressive therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. The Lancet. Microbe. 2026.

    Open original source in a new tab
ABOUT THIS MONITOR

Understanding includes the limits.

This is an AI-assisted evidence summary, not a clinician endorsement. Read each original paper for its complete methods, population and limitations. Different studies can ask different questions and report different kinds of results.

Dates marked “added” describe when a finding entered this monitor, not when the study was published or clinically reviewed. Personal health and treatment decisions belong in a conversation with a qualified clinician.

KEEP YOUR QUESTIONS CLOSE

A little more understanding.
Wherever you are.

Explore the ModernDoc app