Accessibility Evaluation of COVID-19 Vaccine Registration Websites across the United States.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Alismail S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8244541 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAnticipating an initial shortage of vaccines for COVID-19, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in the United States developed priority vaccine allocations for specific demographic groups in the population. This study evaluates the performance of the CDC vaccine allocation strategy with respect to multiple potentially competing vaccination goals (minimizing mortality, cases, infections, and years of life lost (YLL)), under the same framework as the CDC allocation: four priority vaccination groups and population demographics stratified by age, comorbidities, occupation and living condition (congested or non-congested).Methods and findingsWe developed a compartmental disease model that incorporates key elements of the current pandemic including age-varying susceptibility to infection, age-varying clinical fraction, an active case-count dependent social distancing level, and time-varying infectivity (accounting for the emergence of more infectious virus strains). The CDC allocation strategy is compared to all other possibly optimal allocations that stagger vaccine roll-out in up to four phases (17.5 million strategies). The CDC allocation strategy performed well in all vaccination goals but never optimally. Under the developed model, the CDC allocation deviated from the optimal allocations by small amounts, with 0.19% more deaths, 4.0% more cases, 4.07% more infections, and 0.97% higher YLL, than the respective optimal strategies. The CDC decision to not prioritize the vaccination of individuals under the age of 16 was optimal, as was the prioritization of health-care workers and other essential workers over non-essential workers. Finally, a higher prioritization of individuals with comorbidities in all age groups improved outcomes compared to the CDC allocation.ConclusionThe developed approach can be used to inform the design of future vaccine allocation strategies in the United States, or adapted for use by other countries seeking to optimize the effectiveness of their vaccine allocation strategies.
| S-EPMC8598051 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8254130 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the concurrent development of vaccines offered a rare and somewhat unprecedented opportunity to study antivaccination behavior as it formed over time via the use of archived versions of websites.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess how existing antivaccination websites modified their content to address COVID-19 vaccines and pandemic restrictions.MethodsUsing a preexisting collection of 25 antivaccination websites curated by the IvyPlus Web Collection Program prior to the pandemic and crawled every 6 months via Archive-It, we conducted a content analysis to see how these websites acknowledged or ignored COVID-19 vaccines and pandemic restrictions. Websites were assessed for financial behaviors such as having storefronts, mention of COVID-19 vaccines in general or by manufacturer name, references to personal freedom such as masking, safety concerns like side effects, and skepticism of science.ResultsThe majority of websites addressed COVID-19 vaccines in a negative fashion, with more websites making appeals to personal freedom or expressing skepticism of science than questioning safety. This can potentially be attributed to the lack of available safety data about the vaccines at the time of data collection. Many of the antivaccination websites we evaluated actively sought donations and had a membership option, evidencing these websites have financial motivations and actively build a community around these issues. The content analysis also offered the opportunity to test the viability of archived websites for use in scholarly research. The archived versions of the websites had significant shortcomings, particularly in search functionality, and required supplementation with the live websites. For web archiving to be a viable source of stand-alone content for research, the technology needs to make significant improvements in its capture abilities.ConclusionsIn summary, we found antivaccination websites existing prior to the COVID-19 pandemic largely adapted their messaging to address COVID-19 vaccines with very few sites ignoring the pandemic altogether. This study also demonstrated the timely and significant need for more robust web archiving capabilities as web-based environments become more ephemeral and unstable.
| S-EPMC9838720 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVaccine hesitancy is the next great barrier for public health. Arab Americans are a rapidly growing demographic in the United States with limited information on the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy. We therefore sought to study the attitudes towards the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine amongst Arab American health professionals living in the United States.MethodsThis was a cross sectional study utilizing an anonymous online survey. The survey was distributed via e-mail to National Arab American Medical Association members and Arab-American Center for Economic and Social Services healthcare employees. Respondents were considered vaccine hesitant if they selected responses other than a willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.ResultsA total of 4000 surveys were sent via e-mail from 28 December 2020 to 31 January 2021, and 513 responses were received. The highest group of respondents were between the ages of 18-29 years and physicians constituted 48% of the respondents. On multivariable analysis, we found that respondents who had declined an influenza vaccine in the preceding 5 years (p < 0.001) and allied health professionals (medical assistants, hospital administrators, case managers, researchers, scribes, pharmacists, dieticians and social workers) were more likely to be vaccine hesitant (p = 0.025). In addition, respondents earning over $150,000 US dollars annually were less likely to be vaccine hesitant and this finding was significant on multivariable analysis (p = 0.011).ConclusionsVaccine hesitancy among health care providers could have substantial impact on vaccine attitudes of the general population, and such data may help inform vaccine advocacy efforts.
| S-EPMC8471462 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccine hesitancy in the US throughout the pandemic has revealed inconsistent results. This systematic review has compared COVID-19 vaccine uptake across US and investigated predictors of vaccine hesitancy and acceptance across different groups. A search of PUBMED database was conducted till 17th July, 2021. Articles that met the inclusion criteria were screened and 65 studies were selected for a quantitative analysis. The overall vaccine acceptance rate ranged from 12 to 91.4%, the willingness of studies using the 10-point scale ranged from 3.58 to 5.12. Increased unwillingness toward COVID-19 vaccine and Black/African Americans were found to be correlated. Sex, race, age, education level, and income status were identified as determining factors of having a low or high COVID-19 vaccine uptake. A change in vaccine acceptance in the US population was observed in two studies, an increase of 10.8 and 7.4%, respectively, between 2020 and 2021. Our results confirm that hesitancy exists in the US population, highest in Black/African Americans, pregnant or breastfeeding women, and low in the male sex. It is imperative for regulatory bodies to acknowledge these statistics and consequently, exert efforts to mitigate the burden of unvaccinated individuals and revise vaccine delivery plans, according to different vulnerable subgroups, across the country.
| S-EPMC8650625 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pregnant persons are at higher risk of severe COVID-19. Although vaccination is recommended, COVID-19 vaccination rates are lower among pregnant persons compared to the non-pregnant population. We aimed to evaluate acceptance of any dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy. A national online cross-sectional survey of US adults who were pregnant between December 2020 and July 2021 was used to measure COVID-19 vaccine behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs. Post-stratification weighting was used to ensure representativeness to the US population. Marginal log-binomial models were used to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, accounting for sociodemographic factors. Of 5,660 who responded to survey advertisements, 2,213 met eligibility criteria and completed the survey; 55.4% of respondents received or planned to receive COVID-19 vaccine prior to or during pregnancy, 27.0% planned to vaccinate after pregnancy, 8.8% were unsure and 8.7% had no plans to vaccinate. Individuals were more likely to receive or plan to receive COVID-19 vaccine if they had group prenatal care (aPR 1.57; 95% CI 1.40, 1.75), were employed in a workplace with a policy recommending vaccination (aPR 1.15; 95% CI 1.06, 1.26), and believed COVID-19 vaccines are safe (aPR 2.86; 95% CI 2.49, 3.29). Pregnant persons who were recommended COVID-19 vaccination by their healthcare provider less commonly reported concerns about vaccine safety (35.5% vs 55.9%) and were more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccines (aPR 1.52; 95% CI 1.31, 1.76). COVID-19 vaccine acceptance during pregnancy is not universal and public health intervention will be needed to continue to increase vaccine coverage.
| S-EPMC9450469 | biostudies-literature
Project description:On 29 October 2021, the U.S. FDA authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine for emergency use in children ages 5-11 years. Racial/ethnic minorities have born the greatest burden of pediatric COVID-19 infection and hospitalization. Research indicates high prevalence of parental vaccine hesitancy among the general population, underscoring the urgency of understanding how race/ethnicity may influence parents' decision to vaccinate their children. Two weeks prior to FDA approval, 400 Hispanic and non-Hispanic Asian, Black, and White parents of children 5-10 years participated in an online survey assessing determinants of COVID-19 pediatric vaccine hesitancy. Compared to 31% Black, 45% Hispanic, and 25% White parents, 62% of Asian parents planned to vaccinate their child. Bivariate and multivariate ordinal logistic regression demonstrated race/ethnicity, parental vaccine status, education, financial security, perceived childhood COVID-19 susceptibility and severity, vaccine safety and efficacy concerns, community support, and FDA and physician recommendations accounted for 70.3% of variance for vaccine hesitancy. Findings underscore the importance of multipronged population targeted approaches to increase pediatric COVID-19 vaccine uptake including integrating health science literacy with safety and efficacy messaging, communication efforts tailored to parents who express unwillingness to vaccinate, and interventions developed in partnership with and delivered through existing trusted community coalitions.
| S-EPMC8778198 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10840109 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7233187 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The bivalent (original and Omicron BA.4/BA.5) mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine was authorized to offer broader protection against COVID-19. We conducted a matched cohort study to evaluate the effectiveness of the bivalent vaccine in preventing hospitalization for COVID-19 (primary outcome) and medically attended SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospital death (secondary outcomes). Compared to individuals who did not receive bivalent mRNA vaccination but received ≥2 doses of any monovalent mRNA vaccine, the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) against hospitalization for COVID-19 was 70.3% (95% confidence interval, 64.0%-75.4%). rVE was consistent across subgroups and not modified by time since last monovalent dose or number of monovalent doses received. Protection was durable ≥3 months after the bivalent booster. rVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring emergency department/urgent care and against COVID-19 hospital death was 55.0% (50.8%-58.8%) and 82.7% (63.7%-91.7%), respectively. The mRNA-1273 bivalent booster provides additional protection against hospitalization for COVID-19, medically attended SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19 hospital death.
| S-EPMC10511551 | biostudies-literature