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: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:This paper adds some formal research to the success of ongoing efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic by examining the drivers of the administration and delivery efficiency of coronavirus vaccines. For this purpose, we use data from the 50 US states and place the formal analysis in the context of socio-economic drivers of vaccinations. Results show that state-economic prosperity and rural population aid vaccine administration and delivery efficiency. Delivery efficiency improves in states with more nursing homes per capita, in states with more COVID-19 deaths, and with more health workers. A subset of health workers, including physicians and nurses, did not significantly impact administration or efficiency. On the other hand, vaccination efficiency was lower in states with a centralized public health agency. States with a larger share of the elderly population and those with Democrats as governors were no different from others with regard to vaccinations. Robustness checks are performed using vaccination data from a more recent period. Finally, a state’s legacy of corrupt activity, across two different time dimensions, is broadly consistent with the greasing effects of corruption. Some policy implications based on the evolving data are discussed. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11066-021-09148-w.
| S-EPMC8211434 | biostudies-literature
Project description:On April 13, 2021, U.S. authorities announced an investigation into potential adverse events associated with the Johnson & Johnson (Janssen, J&J) COVID-19 vaccine and recommended "a pause in the use of this vaccine out of an abundance of caution." We examined whether public attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination shifted after this recommended suspension using an interrupted time series with data from the Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey, which was fielded bi-weekly between January 6 and April 26, 2021. We found no significant changes in trends of the proportion of the U.S. adult population hesitant about getting a COVID-19 vaccine, but a significant increase in concerns about safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines among the already hesitant population.
| S-EPMC8664657 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives:The paper highlights US health policy and technology responses to the COVID-19 pandemic from January 1, 2020 - August 9, 2020. Methods:A review of primary data sources in the US was conducted. The data were summarized to describe national and state-level trends in the spread of COVID-19 and in policy and technology solutions. Results:COVID-19 cases and deaths initially peaked in late March and April, but after a brief reduction in June cases and deaths began rising again July and continued to climb into early August. The US policy response is best characterized by its federalist, decentralized nature. The national government has led in terms of economic and fiscal response, increasing funding for scientific research into testing, treatment, and vaccines, and in creating more favorable regulations for the use of telemedicine. State governments have been responsible for many of the containment, testing, and treatment responses, often with little federal government support. Policies that favor economic re-opening are often followed by increases in state-level case numbers, which are then followed by stricter containment measures, such as mask wearing or pausing re-opening plans. Conclusions:While all US states have begun to "re-open" economic activities, this trend appears to be largely driven by social tensions and economic motivations than an ability to effectively test and surveil populations.
| S-EPMC7451131 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo investigate the differences in vaccine hesitancy and preference of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines between two countries, namely, China and the United States (U.S.).MethodA cross-national survey was conducted in both China and the United States, and discrete choice experiments, as well as Likert scales, were utilized to assess vaccine preference and the underlying factors contributing to vaccination acceptance. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to enable a direct comparison between the two countries.ResultsA total of 9077 (5375 and 3702 from China and the United States, respectively) respondents completed the survey. After propensity score matching, over 82.0% of respondents from China positively accepted the COVID-19 vaccination, while 72.2% of respondents from the United States positively accepted it. Specifically, only 31.9% of Chinese respondents were recommended by a doctor to have COVID-19 vaccination, while more than half of the U.S. respondents were recommended by a doctor (50.2%), local health board (59.4%), or friends and families (64.8%). The discrete choice experiments revealed that respondents from the United States attached the greatest importance to the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines (44.41%), followed by the cost of vaccination (29.57%), whereas those from China held a different viewpoint, that the cost of vaccination covered the largest proportion in their trade-off (30.66%), and efficacy ranked as the second most important attribute (26.34%). Additionally, respondents from China tended to be much more concerned about the adverse effect of vaccination (19.68% vs. 6.12%) and have a lower perceived severity of being infected with COVID-19.ConclusionAlthough the overall acceptance and hesitancy of COVID-19 vaccination in both countries are high, underpinned distinctions between these countries were observed. Owing to the differences in COVID-19 incidence rates, cultural backgrounds, and the availability of specific COVID-19 vaccines in the two countries, vaccine rollout strategies should be nation-dependent.
| S-EPMC8232230 | biostudies-literature