A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of vaccination on prevention of long COVID
Issued Date
2025-12-01
Resource Type
eISSN
20411723
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-105022758286
Journal Title
Nature Communications
Volume
16
Issue
1
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Nature Communications Vol.16 No.1 (2025)
Suggested Citation
Green R., Marjenberg Z., Lip G.Y.H., Banerjee A., Wisnivesky J., Delaney B.C., Peluso M.J., Wynberg E., Abduljawad S. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of vaccination on prevention of long COVID. Nature Communications Vol.16 No.1 (2025). doi:10.1038/s41467-025-65302-0 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/113318
Title
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of vaccination on prevention of long COVID
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Long COVID affects millions worldwide and its prevention is a critical public health strategy. While prior analyses show primary vaccination prevents long COVID in subsequent infections, the effect of booster vaccination on long COVID after Omicron infections is unclear. This systematic review identifies 31 observational studies, of which 11 are suitable for pairwise meta-analyses. The pooled odds ratio (OR) of long COVID in those vaccinated (any dose) versus unvaccinated is 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70–0.85; p < 0.0001; 10 studies). ORs were also lower for primary course vaccination versus unvaccinated (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.79–0.83; p < 0.0001; 3 studies), booster vaccination versus unvaccinated (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.63–0.86; p = 0.0001; 4 studies), and booster vaccination versus primary course vaccination (OR 77; 95% CI 0.65–0.92; p = 0.0044; 3 studies). These findings indicate that booster vaccination can provide additional protection against long COVID, highlighting the importance of seasonal vaccination against new SARS-CoV-2 variants. They should, however, be interpreted cautiously, given the small number of studies and the low quality of evidence.