About: http://data.cimple.eu/claim-review/b0eeaeca2d1d4180257208bc46d9141d7b5e76e7d4b99615e5b0c58e

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- owl:sameAs
- Inference Rule:

About: http://data.cimple.eu/claim-review/b0eeaeca2d1d4180257208bc46d9141d7b5e76e7d4b99615e5b0c58e Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : schema:ClaimReview, within Data Space : data.cimple.eu associated with source document(s)

Attributes	Values
rdf:type	schema:ClaimReview
http://data.cimple...lizedReviewRating	not verifiable
schema:url	http://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-pfizer-vaccine-efficacy-israel/
schema:text	“Two Pfizer doses 'are 99.96% effective': Double jab weeks apart prevents almost ALL cases of Covid-19, research in Israel suggests”. The Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine has been shown to be over 90% effective, but not necessarily as effective as recently claimed in the Daily Mail. The Mail reported that the full two-dose vaccination programme was 99.96% effective. This was based on reports that among 715,425 people vaccinated in Israel, 317 (0.04%) later contracted the virus. The data was also reported by the Metro and the Sun, which suggested something similar by claiming the vaccine stopped or prevented 99.96% of cases. This is not how to calculate how effective a vaccine is. This is normally done through what is called an efficacy rate. An efficacy rate is calculated by comparing the number of people who get infected after vaccination to the number who get infected in an unvaccinated control group. So if you saw 90% fewer infections in the vaccinated group compared to the control group, you would say the vaccine has 90% efficacy. What the Mail suggests is a measure of effectiveness is wrong, because it just looks at infections in the vaccinated group, not how that compares to a group who haven’t been vaccinated. For example, the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine trial data showed that 30 people—or 0.5% of its vaccinated group—were later infected, compared to 101, or 1.7%, of the non-vaccinated group. This means the efficacy rate was 70.4% because infections were that much lower in the vaccinated group. But if you looked simply at the rate of infection in each group separately, the vaccine would appear 99.5% effective (given only 0.5% of the vaccinated group later caught the virus), and not getting vaccinated would also be 98.3% effective, given only 1.7% of that group were later infected. This clearly demonstrates that you can’t just look at the infection rate among vaccinated people alone to calculate the efficacy rate.
schema:mentions	Daily Mail Sun Jab Israel Pfizer Treatment and control groups dbpedia:COVID-19 dbpedia:COVID-19_vaccine dbpedia:Oxford–AstraZeneca_COVID-19_vaccine
schema:reviewRating	The Pfizer vaccine has an efficacy rate of over 90%. The 99.96% figure is not an efficacy rate but the proportion of people vaccinated in Israel who did not later test positive for the virus.
schema:author	full-fact
schema:datePublished	2021-02-02 (xsd:date)
schema:inLanguage	English
schema:itemReviewed	http://data.cimple.eu/claim/b1a1481e7286bb25863576ed0c69483019886fa1c8c5cc283d303bf5

Faceted Search & Find service v1.16.115 as of Oct 09 2023

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3238 as of Jul 16 2024, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-musl), Single-Server Edition (126 GB total memory, 2 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2025 OpenLink Software