"The Risk Seems Too High": Thoughts and Feelings about COVID-19 Vaccination.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Moore R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8394920 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
"The Risk Seems Too High": Thoughts and Feelings about COVID-19 Vaccination.
Moore Ramey R Willis Don E DE Shah Sumit K SK Purvis Rachel S RS Shields Xochitl X McElfish Pearl A PA
International journal of environmental research and public health 20210817 16
The purpose of this study was to describe the thoughts and feelings of individuals expressing concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine. A qualitative descriptive study was conducted in order to examine the thoughts and feelings of participants who are hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine. Data were collected from 754 participants using an online instrument. Emergent themes included a lack of knowledge about the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine; concerns over the speed of development, testing, and approv ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Thoughts, feelings, and behaviors during traumatic events, that is, peritraumatic reactions, are key to post-trauma psychopathology development. Qualitative research is required to investigate whether existing quantitative methods capture the range and complexity of peritraumatic reactions as described by survivors. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 104 earthquake survivors. Participants reported experiencing various peritraumatic reactions (M = 21, range = 6-43). The survivors' accounts confirmed presence and overall phenomenological characteristics of commonly studied peritraumatic reactions such as dissociation, distress, mental defeat, and immobility. In addition, novel and understudied reactions were identified: cognitive overload, hyperfocus, and emotion regulation, as well as positive affect. Finally, a number of cross-cutting phenomena were identified such as the social nature of many reactions and survivors evaluating their reactions as difficult to put into words. These findings have implications for the conceptualization of peritraumatic reactions, for trauma-focused psychotherapeutic interventions, and for the wellbeing of disaster survivors.
| S-EPMC7753093 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study investigated how young Italian people experienced the period of peak spread of COVID-19 in their country by probing their emotions, thoughts, events, and actions related to interpersonal and community bonds. This approach to the pandemic will highlight social dimensions that characterized contextual interactions from the specific perspective of Community Psychology. The aim was to investigate young people's experiences because they are the most fragile group due to their difficulty staying home and apart from their peers and because they are, at the same time, the most potentially dangerous people due to their urge to gather in groups. The research involved 568 university students, 475 females, and 93 males, with an average age of 21.82 years (SD = 4.836). The collected data were analyzed with the Grounded Theory Methodology, using the Atlas 8.0 software. From the textual data, representative codes were defined and grouped into 10 categories, which reflect the individuals' prosocial attitudes, behaviors, and values. These categories formed three macro-categories, called: "Collective Dimensions," which includes Connectedness, Solidarity, Italian-ness, Social Problems, and Collective Mourning; "Prosocial Orientation," which includes Trust and Hope; and "Collective Values," which includes Values of Freedom, Respect of Social Rules, and Civic-Mindedness. All these macro-categories are indicative of the shared feelings experienced by Italians during the first time of the pandemic. Further practical implications of these results will be discussed, including a consideration of the risk of developing distress and improving well-being, as well as promoting preventive behaviors.
| S-EPMC8012730 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We examined how the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of 6,957 students from Germany, assessed between March 16 and April 21, 2020, when COVID-19 became a serious health concern in Germany, varied by personality. The Big Five personality traits-openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and emotional stability-were assessed with the International Personality Item Pool. Students were asked whether they kept up with the COVID-19 news, followed specific governmental rules and recommendations (washing hands more, using public transport less, avoiding larger crowds, and restricting meetings with family/friends), hoarded supplies, felt less secure in public places, or expected financial losses due to the crisis. Logistic regressions adjusted for sociodemographic factors and cognitive abilities revealed that more conscientious (odds ratio (OR) = 1.133) and more agreeable (OR = 1.285) students kept up with the news more. More agreeable students were also more likely to wash their hands more often/intensively (OR = 1.262), use public transport less (OR = 1.182), avoid crowds (OR = 1.320), and restrict meetings with family/friends (OR = 1.410). Other Big Five traits were not associated with these behaviors, except that less emotionally stable individuals tended to use public transport less often (OR = 1.162). Additionally, less emotionally stable students, in particular, more often bought more supplies than usual (OR = 1.322), felt insecure in public spaces (OR = 1.597), and expected financial losses (OR = 1.270). Moreover, less open (OR = 0.876) and more conscientious (OR = 1.235) students more often felt insecure in public spaces, and more extraverted individuals more often expected financial losses (OR = 1.180). Taken together, our findings suggest that more agreeable individuals, in particular, tend to comply with governmental rules and recommendations to fight COVID-19, whereas less emotionally stable individuals, in particular, tend to hoard supplies, feel insecure, and fear financial losses due to the crisis.
| S-EPMC7703888 | biostudies-literature
Project description:RNA was extracted from whole blood of subjects collected in Tempus tubes prior to COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccination. D01 and D21 correspond to samples collected at pre-dose 1 and pre-dose 2 respectively. RNA was also extracted from blood collected at indicated time points post-vaccination. DB1, DB2, DB4 and DB7 correspond to booster day 1 (pre-booster), booster day 2, booster day 4 and booster day 7 respectively. The case subject experienced cardiac complication following mRNA booster vaccination. We performed gene expression analysis of case versus controls over time.
2023-03-20 | E-MTAB-12829 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Objectives Several studies suggested that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination may lead to uveitis, a vision-threatening condition often associated with a variety of autoimmune or autoinflammatory diseases. This study aims to explore factors that influence the risk of uveitis relapse after COVID-19 vaccination to guide the prevention of disease. Methods Uveitis relapse was evidenced by worsening activity of intraocular inflammation (e.g. anterior chamber cells, vitreous haze) as defined by the Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature Working Group. Time to uveitis relapse since the administration of each dose of COVID-19 vaccine was compared across participants with modifiable variables. Results The primary analysis included 438 non-COVID-19 participants with 857 doses of COVID-19 vaccine administered in total. The median age was 41 years (interquartile range, 30 to 51), and 57.3% were female. A total of 39 episodes of uveitis relapse events occurred in 34 patients after the receipt of a dose of COVID-19 vaccine within 30 days. The median time to relapse after vaccination was 5 days (interquartile range, 1 to 14). Concomitant use of systemic glucocorticoids at the time of vaccination was independently associated with a decrease in risk of relapse after vaccination (HR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.07–0.74]; P value = 0.014). There was a trend in attenuating the risk of relapse with increasing prednisone dose from none to less than 20 mg per day and then to 20 mg per day or greater (P value for trend = 0.029). Conclusions Concomitant treatment with systemic glucocorticoids for uveitis at the time of COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a dose-dependent lower risk of uveitis relapse after vaccination.
| S-EPMC9531657 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe safety of COVID-19 vaccines plays an important role in addressing vaccine hesitancy. We conducted a large cohort study to evaluate the risk of non-COVID-19 mortality after COVID-19 vaccination while adjusting for confounders including individual-level demographics, clinical risk factors, health care utilization, and community-level socioeconomic risk factors.MethodsThe retrospective cohort study consisted of members from seven Vaccine Safety Datalink sites from December 14, 2020 through August 31, 2021. We conducted three separate analyses for each of the three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US. Crude non-COVID-19 mortality rates were reported by vaccine type, age, sex, and race/ethnicity. The counting process model for survival analyses was used to analyze non-COVID-19 mortality where a new observation period began when the vaccination status changed upon receipt of the first dose and the second dose. We used calendar time as the basic time scale in survival analyses to implicitly adjust for season and other temporal trend factors. A propensity score approach was used to adjust for the potential imbalance in confounders between the vaccinated and comparison groups.ResultsFor each vaccine type and across age, sex, and race/ethnicity groups, crude non-COVID-19 mortality rates among COVID-19 vaccinees were lower than those among comparators. After adjusting for confounders with the propensity score approach, the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.49) after dose 1 and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.46-0.50) after dose 2 of the BNT162b2 vaccine, 0.41 (95% CI, 0.39-0.44) after dose 1 and 0.38 (95% CI, 0.37-0.40) after dose 2 of the mRNA-1273 vaccine, and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.51-0.59) after receipt of Ad26.COV2.S.ConclusionWhile residual confounding bias remained after adjusting for several individual-level and community-level risk factors, no increased risk was found for non-COVID-19 mortality among recipients of three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US.
| S-EPMC9763207 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Scientists have traditionally assumed that different kinds of mental states (e.g., fear, disgust, love, memory, planning, concentration, etc.) correspond to different psychological faculties that have domain-specific correlates in the brain. Yet, growing evidence points to the constructionist hypothesis that mental states emerge from the combination of domain-general psychological processes that map to large-scale distributed brain networks. In this paper, we report a novel study testing a constructionist model of the mind in which participants generated three kinds of mental states (emotions, body feelings, or thoughts) while we measured activity within large-scale distributed brain networks using fMRI. We examined the similarity and differences in the pattern of network activity across these three classes of mental states. Consistent with a constructionist hypothesis, a combination of large-scale distributed networks contributed to emotions, thoughts, and body feelings, although these mental states differed in the relative contribution of those networks. Implications for a constructionist functional architecture of diverse mental states are discussed.
| S-EPMC3453527 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceAllergic history in individuals with confirmed anaphylaxis to a messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine is common. However, the risk factors for allergy symptoms after receiving the vaccine are unknown.ObjectiveTo assess the association between self-reported history of high-risk allergy and self-reported allergic reactions after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination of health care employees.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study obtained demographic, medical, and vaccine administration data of employees of Mass General Brigham from the institutional electronic health record. Employees who received at least 1 dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine between December 14, 2020, and February 1, 2021, and who completed at least 1 postvaccination symptom survey in the 3 days after vaccination were included.ExposuresSelf-reported history of high-risk allergy, defined as a previous severe allergic reaction to a vaccine, an injectable medication, or other allergen.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was 1 or more self-reported allergic reactions in the first 3 days after dose 1 or dose 2 of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Multivariable log binomial regression was used to assess the association between allergic reactions and high-risk allergy status.ResultsA total of 52 998 health care employees (mean [SD] age, 42 [14] years; 38 167 women [72.0%]) were included in the cohort, of whom 51 706 (97.6%) received 2 doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and 474 (0.9%) reported a history of high-risk allergy. Individuals with vs without a history of high-risk allergy reported more allergic reactions after receiving dose 1 or 2 of the vaccine (11.6% [n = 55] vs 4.7% [n = 2461]). In the adjusted model, a history of high-risk allergy was associated with an increased risk of allergic reactions (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 2.46; 95% CI, 1.92-3.16), with risk being highest for hives (aRR, 3.81; 95% CI, 2.33-6.22) and angioedema (aRR, 4.36; 95% CI, 2.52-7.54).Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study found that self-reported history of high-risk allergy was associated with an increased risk of self-reported allergic reactions within 3 days of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. However, reported allergy symptoms did not impede the completion of the 2-dose vaccine protocol among a cohort of eligible health care employees, supporting the overall safety of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.
| S-EPMC8548941 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9633623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection.MethodsIn this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7-15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures.FindingsPrevious infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05-0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01-0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease.InterpretationPrevious infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection.FundingNational Institutes of Health.
| S-EPMC10518569 | biostudies-literature