Vaccinating adolescents wisely against COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bonati M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8413465 | biostudies-literature | 2021
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Vaccinating adolescents wisely against COVID-19.
Bonati Maurizio M Benelli Eva E
BMJ paediatrics open 20210901 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:COVID-19 vaccines have been introduced in children and adolescents in many countries. However, high levels of community transmission and infection-derived immunity make the decision to introduce COVID-19 vaccination of children in countries yet to do so particularly challenging. For example, other vaccine preventable diseases, including measles and polio, generally have far higher childhood morbidity and mortality in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) than COVID-19, and coverage with these vaccines has declined during the pandemic. Many countries are yet to introduce pneumococcal conjugate and rotavirus vaccines for children, which prevent common causes of childhood death, or human papillomavirus vaccine for adolescents. The Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines that have been widely tested in children and adolescents have a positive risk-benefit profile. However, the benefit is less compared with other life-saving vaccines in this age group, particularly in LMICs and settings with widespread infection-derived immunity. The resources required for rollout may also pose a considerable challenge in LMICs. In this paper, we describe COVID-19 in children, with a focus on LMICs, and summarise the published literature on safety, efficacy and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents. We highlight the complexity of decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccination of children now that most of this low-risk population benefit from infection-derived immunity. We emphasise that at-risk groups should be prioritised for COVID-19 vaccination; and that if COVID-19 vaccines are introduced for children, the opportunity should be taken to improve coverage of routine childhood vaccines and preventative healthcare. Additionally, we highlight the paucity of epidemiological data in LMICs, and that for future epidemics, measures need to be taken to ensure equitable access to safe and efficacious vaccines before exposure to infection.
| S-EPMC10373744 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This article examines issues related to COVID-19 inoculations for children. The bulk of the official COVID-19-attributed deaths per capita occur in the elderly with high comorbidities, and the COVID-19 attributed deaths per capita are negligible in children. The bulk of the normalized post-inoculation deaths also occur in the elderly with high comorbidities, while the normalized post-inoculation deaths are small, but not negligible, in children. Clinical trials for these inoculations were very short-term (a few months), had samples not representative of the total population, and for adolescents/children, had poor predictive power because of their small size. Further, the clinical trials did not address changes in biomarkers that could serve as early warning indicators of elevated predisposition to serious diseases. Most importantly, the clinical trials did not address long-term effects that, if serious, would be borne by children/adolescents for potentially decades. A novel best-case scenario cost-benefit analysis showed very conservatively that there are five times the number of deaths attributable to each inoculation vs those attributable to COVID-19 in the most vulnerable 65+ demographic. The risk of death from COVID-19 decreases drastically as age decreases, and the longer-term effects of the inoculations on lower age groups will increase their risk-benefit ratio, perhaps substantially.
| S-EPMC8437699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With the recent licensure of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 in the 5- to 11-year-old age group, the public health impact of a childhood immunization campaign is of interest. Using a mathematical epidemiological model, we project that childhood vaccination carries minimal risk and yields modest public health benefits. These include large relative reductions in child morbidity and mortality, although the absolute reduction is small because these events are rare. Furthermore, the model predicts "altruistic" absolute reductions in adult cases, hospitalizations, and mortality. However, vaccinating children to benefit adults should be considered from an ethical as well as a public health perspective. From a global health perspective, an additional ethical consideration is the justice of giving priority to children in high-income settings at low risk of severe disease while vaccines have not been made available to vulnerable adults in low-income settings. IMPORTANCE Countries have recently begun implementation of childhood vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 with the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccine in children 5 to 11 years of age. Because SARS-CoV-2 disease severity is remarkably age dependent, vaccinating children may have modest public health benefits, relative to the unequivocal benefit of vaccinating vulnerable older adults. Furthermore, vaccinating children to "altruistically" increase herd immunity should be considered from an ethical as well as a public health perspective. An additional question is related to global social justice: should priority be given to vaccinating children in high-income settings while older adult populations in low-resource settings have limited access to vaccine? To address the risks and benefits of childhood vaccination, we provide a balanced commentary, supported by a mathematical epidemiological model, using Australia and Alberta, Canada, as case studies. We give highlights of the modeling findings in the commentary and include details in the supplemental materials for interested readers.
| S-EPMC8764932 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To evaluate the joint impact of childhood vaccination rates and school masking policies on community transmission and severe outcomes due to COVID-19, we utilized a stochastic, agent-based simulation of North Carolina to test 24 health policy scenarios. In these scenarios, we varied the childhood (ages 5 to 19) vaccination rate relative to the adult's (ages 20 to 64) vaccination rate and the masking relaxation policies in schools. We measured the overall incidence of disease, COVID-19-related hospitalization, and mortality from 2021 July 1 to 2023 July 1. Our simulation estimates that removing all masks in schools in January 2022 could lead to a 31% to 45%, 23% to 35%, and 13% to 19% increase in cumulative infections for ages 5 to 9, 10 to 19, and the total population, respectively, depending on the childhood vaccination rate. Additionally, achieving a childhood vaccine uptake rate of 50% of adults could lead to a 31% to 39% reduction in peak hospitalizations overall masking scenarios compared with not vaccinating this group. Finally, our simulation estimates that increasing vaccination uptake for the entire eligible population can reduce peak hospitalizations in 2022 by an average of 83% and 87% across all masking scenarios compared to the scenarios where no children are vaccinated. Our simulation suggests that high vaccination uptake among both children and adults is necessary to mitigate the increase in infections from mask removal in schools and workplaces.
| S-EPMC9295200 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The global impact of COVID-19 on children emphasises the need for effective vaccination. While most cases are mild, those with underlying conditions face severe risks. Public health agencies promote various paediatric vaccination approaches. Japan universally recommends vaccination, while Korea prioritises high-risk children. Despite similar healthcare systems, Japan's coverage rates (19%-72%) surpass Korea's (2%-55%). Korea's child death rates are higher, indicating increased risk. Both lack methods to address individual risks, hindering prevention. This study advocates universal vaccination to mitigate future pandemics' impact on children systematically.
| S-EPMC11002420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We study the experience with COVID-19 vaccination of an initially naïve population, which can inform planning for vaccination against the next novel, highly transmissible pathogen. We focus on the first two pandemic years (wild strain through Delta), because after the Omicron wave in early 2022, very few people were still SARS-CoV-2-naïve. Almost all were vaccinated, infected, or often both. We review the evidence on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) and waning effectiveness over time and the relative effectiveness of the four principal vaccines used in developed Western countries: BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA1273 (Moderna), Ad26.CoV2.S (Johnson&Johnson), and ChAdOx1-S (AstraZeneca). As a basis for our analysis, we conducted a PRISMA-compliant review of all studies on PubMed through 15 August 2022, reporting VE against four endpoints for these four vaccines: any infection, symptomatic infection, hospitalization, and death. The mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA1273) had high initial VE against all endpoints but protection waned after approximately six months, with BNT162b2 declining faster than mRNA1273. Both mRNA vaccines outperformed the viral vector vaccines (Ad26.CoV2.S and ChAdOx1-S). A third "booster" dose, roughly six months after the initial doses, substantially reduced symptomatic infection, hospitalization, and death. In hindsight, a third dose should be seen as part of the normal vaccination schedule. Our analysis highlights the importance of the real-time population-level surveillance needed to assess evidence for waning, and the need for rapid regulatory response to this evidence.
| S-EPMC10820171 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To evaluate the joint impact of childhood vaccination rates and masking policies, in schools and workplaces, on community transmission and severe outcomes due to COVID-19. We utilized a stochastic, agent-based simulation of North Carolina, to evaluate the impact of 24 health policy decisions on overall incidence of disease, COVID-19 related hospitalization, and mortality from July 1, 2021-July 1, 2023. Universal mask removal in schools in January 2022 could lead to a 38.1-47%, 27.6-36.2%, and 15.9-19.7% increase in cumulative infections for ages 5-9, 10-19, and the total population, respectively, depending on the rate of vaccination of children relative to the adult population. Additionally, without increased vaccination uptake in the adult population, a 25% increase in child vaccination uptake from 50% to 75% uptake and from 75% to 100% uptake relative to the adult population, leads to a 22% and 18% or 28% and 33% decrease in peak hospitalizations in 2022 across scenarios when masks are removed either January 1st or March 8th 2022, respectively. Increasing vaccination uptake for the entire eligible population can reduce peak hospitalizations in 2022 by an average of 89% and 92% across all masking scenarios compared to the scenarios where no children are vaccinated. High vaccination uptake among both children and adults is necessary to mitigate the increase in infections from mask removal in schools and workplaces.
| S-EPMC8669851 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo offer a quantitative risk-benefit analysis of two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among adolescents in England.SettingEngland.DesignFollowing the risk-benefit analysis methodology carried out by the US Centers for Disease Control, we calculated historical rates of hospital admission, Intensive Care Unit admission and death for ascertained SARS-CoV-2 cases in children aged 12-17 in England. We then used these rates alongside a range of estimates for incidence of long COVID, vaccine efficacy and vaccine-induced myocarditis, to estimate hospital and Intensive Care Unit admissions, deaths and cases of long COVID over a period of 16 weeks under assumptions of high and low case incidence.ParticipantsAll 12-17 year olds with a record of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in England between 1 July 2020 and 31 March 2021 using national linked electronic health records, accessed through the British Heart Foundation Data Science Centre.Main outcome measuresHospitalisations, Intensive Care Unit admissions, deaths and cases of long COVID averted by vaccinating all 12-17 year olds in England over a 16-week period under different estimates of future case incidence.ResultsAt high future case incidence of 1000/100,000 population/week over 16 weeks, vaccination could avert 4430 hospital admissions and 36 deaths over 16 weeks. At the low incidence of 50/100,000/week, vaccination could avert 70 hospital admissions and two deaths over 16 weeks. The benefit of vaccination in terms of hospitalisations in adolescents outweighs risks unless case rates are sustainably very low (below 30/100,000 teenagers/week). Benefit of vaccination exists at any case rate for the outcomes of death and long COVID, since neither have been associated with vaccination to date.ConclusionsGiven the current (as at 15 September 2021) high case rates (680/100,000 population/week in 10-19 year olds) in England, our findings support vaccination of adolescents against SARS-CoV2.
| S-EPMC8649477 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The question of whether children should be vaccinated against COVID-19 is currently being argued. The risk-benefit analysis of the vaccine in children has been more challenging because of the low prevalence of acute COVID-19 in children and the lack of confidence in the relative effects of the vaccine and the disease. One of the most convincing arguments for vaccinating healthy children is to protect them from long-term consequences. The aim of this study was to assess Jordanian parents' intention to vaccinate their children. This is an Internet-based cross-sectional survey. The researchers prepared a Google Forms survey and shared the link with a number of Jordanian Facebook generic groups. Data were gathered between September and November 2021. In this study, convenience sampling was used. Knowledge about COVID-19 and preventive practices against COVID-19 were calculated for each participant. A total of 819 participants completed the survey (female = 70.9%). Of these, 274 (30.2%) participants intended to vaccinate their children, whereas the rest were either unsure 176 (21.5%) or intended not to vaccinate their children 396 (48.4%). The variables that increased the odds of answering "No" vs "Yes" to "will you vaccinate your children against COVID-19" included not willing to take the vaccines themselves (OR 3.75; CI, 1.46-9.62) and low protective practice group (OR 1.73;CI, 1.12-2.68). Participants had significant levels of refusal/hesitancy. Several barriers to vaccination were identified; attempts to overcome these should be stepped up.
| S-EPMC9225601 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There are typically lower COVID-19 vaccination rates among developing versus higher-income countries, which is exacerbated by greater vaccine hesitancy. However, despite the increasing evidence of safety, parents are still reluctant to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. This is a concern in countries experiencing successive waves, such as Pakistan. Consequently, the objective of this study was to gain better understanding and practice regarding parents vaccinating their children against COVID-19 in Pakistan. A cross-sectional study was conducted to measure parents' attitudes towards vaccinating their children. In total, 451 parents participated in the study, giving a response rate of 70.4%; 67.4% were female, 43.2% belonged to the 40-49 years age group, and 47.7% had three children, with 73% of parents fully immunized against COVID-19. We found that 84.7% of parents did not consider COVID-19 to be a very serious issue, and 53.9% considered that their children were not at high risk of COVID-19. Overall, only a quarter of the study participants had currently vaccinated their children and 11.8% were willing to vaccinate their children in the near future. Parents who had a better knowledge of COVID-19, secondary or higher education, children who had chronic illness, and those parents whose children had been infected with COVID-19 were more likely to have their children vaccinated. The most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy were "my child is not at high risk of COVID-19" (61%) and "I am afraid to put/inject a foreign object inside my child's body" (52.2%). Overall, vaccine acceptance was low among the parents of the children. Those parents with higher education, chronic illnesses, greater knowledge of COVID-19 and its vaccines, and those whose children had been infected with COVID-19 were significantly (p < 0.001) inclined towards vaccinating their children. Effective campaigns as well as awareness sessions are needed to address misinformation and reduce vaccine hesitancy.
| S-EPMC10487428 | biostudies-literature