[R] Analysis of Russian vaccine trial outcomes suggests they are lazily faked. Distribution of efficacies across age groups is quite improbable

Question

[The article](https://www.reddit.com/r/statistics/comments/vh2ecs/analysis_of_russian_vaccine_results_suggests_they/)

[Twitter summary](https://twitter.com/K_Sheldrick/status/1538901545802051585)

From the abstract: In the 1000-trial simulation for the AstraZeneca vaccine, in 23.8% of simulated trials, the observed efficacies of all age subgroups fell within the efficacy bounds for age subgroups in the published article. The J + J simulation showed 44.7%, Moderna 51.1%, Pfizer 30.5%, and **0.0% of the Sputnik simulated trials had all age subgroups fall within the limits of the efficacy estimates described by the published article. In 50,000 simulated trials of the Sputnik vaccine, 0.026% had all age subgroups fall within the limits of the efficacy estimates described by the published article, whereas 99.974% did not.**

Answer 1

As one of the authors of the study, I'd be interested in comments from this community. It's quite a simple simulation, and we weren't the first to notice the abnormal homogeneity of the reported Sputnik efficacy. But communicating the results in a way that could be understood by readers who had never consciously thought about any distribution was another matter.

Answer 2

Research paper is paywalled. Can you share a preprint?
I'm curious if you investigated what simulation settings or data generating process was consistent with the reported efficacy of the Sputnik vaccine? For example was there some non homogeneous efficacy distribution across ages that was consistent? And if so what made it unrealistic?

Answer 3

*Amateurs*