COVID-19 vaccination reduced the risk of post-COVID-19 cardiac and thromboembolic outcomes. These effects were more pronounced for acute COVID-19 outcomes, consistent with known reductions in disease severity following breakthrough versus unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Almost a foregone conclusion nowadays, but I remember when the first J&J booster got pulled there was a lot of (imo justified) concern that COVID vaccines might do more harm than good for people with heart problems. This paper seems to conclude that's not the case
"meta-analytic sHR of 0.22 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.29), 0.53 (0.44 to 0.63) and 0.45 (0.38 to 0.53), respectively, for 0–30 days after SARS-CoV-2 infection, while in the 91–180 days sHR were 0.53 (0.40 to 0.70), 0.72 (0.58 to 0.88) and 0.61 (0.51 to 0.73), respectively"
I hate jargon like this. To translate into human language:
"In a meta-analysis of correlational studies, vaccinated individuals have a risk of developing long-term heart complications which varies by complication. Pulmonary embolism and venous thromboembolism show reductions down to around a quarter or a fifth of unvaccinated individuals during the acute phase, suggesting a very significant reduction in short-term risk. Long-term risks are reduced, but only marginally. Others disorders show more modest or no reduction. Detailed results are shown in Figure 2."
I like language like the above.
It is also helpful to point out that correlation is not causation, and there are other significant differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts. Something like an 80% reduction in risk is unlikely to be due to that, but the more modest effects very likely could be.
No. That's a strawman. I think the point of an abstract should be to provide a summary easy for humans to quickly digest, including researchers skimming hundreds of papers and laypeople.
I think the body and supplemental materials, in contrast, should not have a page limit and provide complete background as needed for replication. Those should have much more than this paper.
COVID-19 vaccination reduced the risk of post-COVID-19 cardiac and thromboembolic outcomes. These effects were more pronounced for acute COVID-19 outcomes, consistent with known reductions in disease severity following breakthrough versus unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Almost a foregone conclusion nowadays, but I remember when the first J&J booster got pulled there was a lot of (imo justified) concern that COVID vaccines might do more harm than good for people with heart problems. This paper seems to conclude that's not the case