National interest may require distributing COVID-19 vaccines to other countries.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rotesi T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8440602 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo quantify the background incidence rates of 15 prespecified adverse events of special interest (AESIs) associated with covid-19 vaccines.DesignMultinational network cohort study.SettingElectronic health records and health claims data from eight countries: Australia, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States, mapped to a common data model.Participants126 661 070 people observed for at least 365 days before 1 January 2017, 2018, or 2019 from 13 databases.Main outcome measuresEvents of interests were 15 prespecified AESIs (non-haemorrhagic and haemorrhagic stroke, acute myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, anaphylaxis, Bell's palsy, myocarditis or pericarditis, narcolepsy, appendicitis, immune thrombocytopenia, disseminated intravascular coagulation, encephalomyelitis (including acute disseminated encephalomyelitis), Guillain-Barré syndrome, and transverse myelitis). Incidence rates of AESIs were stratified by age, sex, and database. Rates were pooled across databases using random effects meta-analyses and classified according to the frequency categories of the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences.ResultsBackground rates varied greatly between databases. Deep vein thrombosis ranged from 387 (95% confidence interval 370 to 404) per 100 000 person years in UK CPRD GOLD data to 1443 (1416 to 1470) per 100 000 person years in US IBM MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid data among women aged 65 to 74 years. Some AESIs increased with age. For example, myocardial infarction rates in men increased from 28 (27 to 29) per 100 000 person years among those aged 18-34 years to 1400 (1374 to 1427) per 100 000 person years in those older than 85 years in US Optum electronic health record data. Other AESIs were more common in young people. For example, rates of anaphylaxis among boys and men were 78 (75 to 80) per 100 000 person years in those aged 6-17 years and 8 (6 to 10) per 100 000 person years in those older than 85 years in Optum electronic health record data. Meta-analytic estimates of AESI rates were classified according to age and sex.ConclusionThis study found large variations in the observed rates of AESIs by age group and sex, showing the need for stratification or standardisation before using background rates for safety surveillance. Considerable population level heterogeneity in AESI rates was found between databases.
| S-EPMC8193077 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pandemic influenza is an international public health concern. In light of the persistent threat of H5N1 avian influenza and the recent pandemic of A/H1N1swine influenza outbreak, public health agencies around the globe are continuously revising their preparedness plans. The A/H1N1 pandemic of 2009 demonstrated that influenza activity and severity might vary considerably among age groups and locations, and the distribution of an effective influenza vaccine may be significantly delayed and staggered. Thus, pandemic influenza vaccine distribution policies should be tailored to the demographic and spatial structures of communities. Here, we introduce a bi-criteria decision-making framework for vaccine distribution policies that is based on a geospatial and demographically-structured model of pandemic influenza transmission within and between counties of Arizona in the Unites States. Based on data from the 2009-2010 H1N1 pandemic, the policy predicted to reduce overall attack rate most effectively is prioritizing counties expected to experience the latest epidemic waves (a policy that may be politically untenable). However, when we consider reductions in both the attack rate and the waiting period for those seeking vaccines, the widely adopted pro rata policy (distributing according to population size) is also predicted to be an effective strategy.
| S-EPMC4295509 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLimited COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among healthcare assistants (HCAs) may adversely impact older adults, who are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 infections. Our study objective was to evaluate the perceptions of COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy in a sample of frontline HCAs, overall and by race and ethnicity.MethodsAn online survey was conducted from December 2020 to January 2021 through national e-mail listserv and private Facebook page for the National Association of Health Care Assistants. Responses from 155 HCAs, including certified nursing assistants, home health aides, certified medical assistants, and certified medication technicians, were included. A 27-item survey asked questions about experiences and perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines, including how confident they were that COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and adequately tested in people of color. Multivariable regression was used to identify associations with confidence in COVID-19 vaccines.ResultsWe analyzed data from 155 completed responses. Among respondents, 23.9% were black and 8.4% Latino/a. Most respondents worked in the nursing home setting (53.5%), followed by hospitals (12.9%), assisted living (11.6%), and home care (10.3%). Respondents expressed low levels of confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, with fewer than 40% expressing at least moderate confidence in safety (38.1%), effectiveness (31.0%), or adequate testing in people of color (27.1%). Non-white respondents reported lower levels of confidence in adequate testing of vaccines compared to white respondents. In bivariate and adjusted models, respondents who gave more favorable scores of organizational leadership at their workplace expressed greater confidence in COVID-19 vaccines.ConclusionFrontline HCAs reported low confidence in COVID-19 vaccines. Stronger organizational leadership in the workplace appears to be an important factor in influencing HCA's willingness to be vaccinated. Action is needed to enhance COVID-19 vaccine uptake in this important population with employers playing an important role to build vaccine confidence and trust among employees.
| S-EPMC8657352 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Health-seeking behaviors change during pandemics and may increase with regard to illnesses with symptoms similar to the pandemic. The global reaction to COVID-19 may drive interest in vaccines for other diseases. OBJECTIVES:Our study investigated the correlation between global online interest in COVID-19 and interest in CDC-recommended routine vaccines. DESIGN, SETTINGS, MEASUREMENTS:This infodemiology study used Google Trends data to quantify worldwide interest in COVID-19 and CDC-recommended vaccines using the unit search volume index (SVI), which estimates volume of online search activity relative to highest volume of searches within a specified period. SVIs from December 30, 2019 to March 30, 2020 were collected for "coronavirus (Virus)" and compared with SVIs of search terms related to CDC-recommended adult vaccines. To account for seasonal variation, we compared SVIs from December 30, 2019 to March 30, 2020 with SVIs from the same months in 2015 to 2019. We performed country-level analyses in ten COVID-19 hotspots and ten countries with low disease burden. RESULTS:There were significant positive correlations between SVIs for "coronavirus (Virus)" and search terms for pneumococcal (R = 0.89, p < 0.0001) and influenza vaccines (R = 0.93, p < 0.0001) in 2020, which were greater than SVIs for the same terms in 2015-2019 (p = 0.005, p < 0.0001, respectively). Eight in ten COVID-19 hotspots demonstrated significant positive correlations between SVIs for coronavirus and search terms for pneumococcal and influenza vaccines. LIMITATIONS:SVIs estimate relative changes in online interest and do not represent the interest of people with no Internet access. CONCLUSION:A peak in worldwide interest in pneumococcal and influenza vaccines coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic in February and March 2020. Trends are likely not seasonal in origin and may be driven by COVID-19 hotspots. Global events may change public perception about the importance of vaccines. Our findings may herald higher demand for pneumonia and influenza vaccines in the upcoming season.
| S-EPMC7315971 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe aimed to elucidate which vaccines were accepted by European countries as valid proof of vaccination against COVID-19 for international travelers.MethodOn 27-September-2021 a cross-sectional study was conducted on VisaGuide.World, that reports on valid vaccines for international travelers. Other databases, lay press and regulatory agencies were also checked. The main outcome measure was which of the vaccines included on the WHO emergency use listing (EUL) [ChAdOx1 (Vaxzevria, Covishield),BNT162b2,mRNA-1273,Ad26.CoV2.S,BBIBP-CorV,CoronaVac] and Sputnik V, were accepted in each country. The influence of the vaccines approved for COVID-19 vaccination programs on the vaccines recognized as proof of vaccination was assessed.ResultsThere was a remarkable heterogeneity on the vaccines accepted as proof of vaccination among 46 countries. Russia accepted only one. Cyprus, Greece and Slovenia accepted all vaccines considered. Eleven countries accepted the seven WHO EUL vaccines: eight EU countries, plus Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. Seven EU countries accepted only the four EMA-authorized vaccines. Considering Covishield as equivalent to Vaxzevria, 69% of countries recognized only vaccinated travelers who received any of the vaccines approved for vaccination programs in the country of arrival as valid.ConclusionVaccines accepted as proof of vaccination should be harmonized. Accepting any of the WHO EUL vaccines would be a scientifically sound objective.
| S-EPMC8977214 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 is a pandemic of unprecedented proportions in recent human history. Less than 18 months since the onset of the pandemic, there are close to two hundred million confirmed cases and four million deaths worldwide. There have also been massive efforts geared towards finding safe and effective vaccines. By July 2021 there were 184 COVID-19 vaccine candidates in pre-clinical development, 105 in clinical development, and 18 vaccines approved for emergency use by at least one regulatory authority. These vaccines include whole virus live attenuated or inactivated, protein-based, viral vector, and nucleic acid vaccines. By mid-2021 three billion doses of COVID-19 vaccine have been administered around the world, mostly in high-income countries. COVID-19 vaccination provides hope for an end to the pandemic, if and only if there would be equal access and optimal uptake in all countries around the world.
| S-EPMC8272971 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Synopsis This manuscript is a narrative review of the rapidly moving COVID-19 vaccine field with an emphasis on clinical efficacy established in both randomized trials and post-marketing surveillance of clinically available vaccines. We review the major clinical trials that supported authorization for general use of the Janssen (Ad.26.CoV2), Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), and Moderna (mRNA-1273) vaccines and the publicly available post-marketing information with the goal of providing a broad, clinically relevant comparison of efficacy and safety. This review is primarily focused on the United States (US) market.
| S-EPMC8802612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccination willingness is a critical factor in pandemics, including the COVID-19 crisis. Therefore, investigating underlying drivers of vaccination willingness/hesitancy is an essential social science contribution. The present study of German residents investigates the mental shortcuts people are using to make sense of unfamiliar vaccine options by examining vaccination willingness for different vaccines using an experimental design in a quantitative survey. German vaccines were preferred over equivalent foreign vaccines, and the favorability ratings of foreign countries where COVID-19 vaccines were developed correlated with the level of vaccination willingness for each vaccine. The patterns in vaccination willingness were more pronounced when the national origin was shown along with the vaccine manufacturer label. The study shows how non-scientific factors drive everyday decision-making about vaccination. Taking such social psychological and communication aspects into account in the design of vaccination campaigns would increase their effectiveness.
| S-EPMC8716032 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We investigated whether countries with higher coverage of childhood live vaccines [BCG or measles-containing-vaccine (MCV)] have reduced risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related mortality, while accounting for known systems differences between countries. In this ecological study of 140 countries using publicly available national-level data, higher vaccine coverage, representing estimated proportion of people vaccinated during the last 14 years, was associated with lower COVID-19 deaths. The associations attenuated for both vaccine variables, and MCV coverage became no longer significant once adjusted for published estimates of the Healthcare access and quality index (HAQI), a validated summary score of healthcare quality indicators. The magnitude of association between BCG coverage and COVID-19 death rate varied according to HAQI, and MCV coverage had little effect on the association between BCG and COVID-19 deaths. While there are associations between live vaccine coverage and COVID-19 outcomes, the vaccine coverage variables themselves were strongly correlated with COVID-19 testing rate, HAQI and life expectancy. This suggests that the population-level associations may be further confounded by differences in structural health systems and policies. Cluster randomised studies of booster vaccines would be ideal to evaluate the efficacy of trained immunity in preventing COVID-19 infections and mortality in vaccinated populations and on community transmission.
| S-EPMC8010281 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8594030 | biostudies-literature