Rationale and objectiveCOVID-19 vaccination is the most effective way to prevent COVID-19. For chronic kidney disease patients on long-term dialysis, there is a lack of evidence on the pros and cons of COVID-19 vaccination. This study was conducted to investigate the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients on dialysis.MethodsPubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systemically searched for cohort, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and cross-sectional studies. Data on immunogenicity rate, antibody titer, survival rate, new infection rate, adverse events, type of vaccine, and patient characteristics such as age, sex, dialysis vintage, immunosuppression rate, and prevalence of diabetes were extracted and analyzed using REVMAN 5.4 and Stata software. A random effects meta-analysis was used to perform the study.ResultsWe screened 191 records and included 38 studies regarding 5,628 participants. The overall immunogenicity of dialysis patients was 87% (95% CI, 84-89%). The vaccine response rate was 85.1 in hemodialysis patients (HDPs) (1,201 of 1,412) and 97.4% in healthy controls (862 of 885). The serological positivity rate was 82.9% (777 of 937) in infection-naive individuals and 98.4% (570 of 579) in patients with previous infection. The Standard Mean Difference (SMD) of antibody titers in dialysis patients with or without previous COVID-19 infection was 1.14 (95% CI, 0.68–1.61). Subgroup analysis showed that the immunosuppression rate was an influential factor affecting the immunogenicity rate (P < 0.0001). Nine studies reported safety indices, among which four local adverse events and seven system adverse events were documented.ConclusionsVaccination helped dialysis patients achieve effective humoral immunity, with an overall immune efficiency of 87.5%. Dialysis patients may experience various adverse events after vaccination; however, the incidence of malignant events is very low, and no reports of death or acute renal failure after vaccination are available, indicating that vaccine regimens may be necessary.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42022342565, identifier: CRD42022342565.

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract:The universities are the main source of national and regional scientific and technical innovation. Furthermore, universities' scientific and technological innovation ability determines a country or regional scientific and technological developing level. How to evaluate the innovation and performance of the universities is still unsolved currently. In this paper, the indexes for evaluating the innovation capacity and performance are proposed, and a systematic analytical method is introduced. In order to test the validity, a university in Henan province of China is selected as an example to evaluate its innovation capacity. The search results indicate that the index and method mentioned in this paper is suit to the scientific research evaluation. Key words: Scientific and technological innovation ability; Evaluation; Analytic nierarchy process IntroductionThe university is the important component of the system of scientific and technical innovation. It is one of the important subjects of the knowledge innovation, and the important source of technological innovation, and having influential impact on development of the regional economy. High-level talents and scientific and technological resources have gathered in the campus, a large number of experts from many aspects, which can contribute for the scientific and technological innovations for regions. In Henan province, however, the scientific and technological innovation ability of the university is still weak on the whole. Thus in order to promote the development of university's scientific and technological innovations of our province better and improve the scientific and technological innovation ability of the university of our province, it is very necessary to develop the activity of rational appraisal.This paper is arranged as following: the second section is literature review on the early study on the scientific and technological innovation (STI); then the study method AHP (analytic hierarchy process) is briefly introduced; section 3 is the index design for the evaluation of the STI of the university. Section 4 is an empirical study on the index selected in the paper; finally, the conclusion is reached in the end of section.