Note: The risk of bias by domain corresponds to the highest risk of bias among outcomes by domain.
The overall risk of bias corresponds to the overall highest risk of bias assessed among outcomes.
| Bias | Author's judgement | Support for judgement |
| Confounding |
Serious |
The analysis adjusted for age, site, time, ethnicity and contact with a COVID-19 case, but not for co-morbidities, sex, socioeconomic status or symptoms at the time of potential vaccination. The authors suggest that adjustment for sex was unnecessary. |
| Selection of participants into the study |
Moderate |
The study used a test-negative design. This has the potential to suffer from selection bias by being restricted to individuals getting a test, although the issues are not yet well understood. |
| Clasification of interventions |
Low |
No particular concerns in this domain - vaccination status is likely to be adequately measured. |
| Deviations from intervention |
Low |
No concerns in this domain - the study was observational. |
| Missing outcome data |
Low |
No concerns in this domain - there is no evidence of missing data |
| Measurement of the outcome |
Low |
No particular concerns in this domain - determination of the outcome is unlikely to be biased |
| Selection of the reported results |
Moderate |
There is no evidence of an analysis plan, and we have concerns that results could have been selected for reporting because of the findings. |
| Overall risk of bias |
Serious |
|
| Overall comment | Concerns about uncontrolled confounding; factors such as socio-economic status and comorbidities were not adjusted for. |