Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Subramanian SV
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8481107 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The basic reproductive number (R0) is a function of contact rates among individuals, transmission probability, and duration of infectiousness. We sought to determine the association between population density and R0 of SARS-CoV-2 across U.S. counties. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using linear mixed models with random intercept and fixed slopes to assess the association of population density and R0, and controlled for state-level effects using random intercepts. We also assessed whether the association was differential across county-level main mode of transportation percentage as a proxy for transportation accessibility, and adjusted for median household income. The median R0 among the United States counties was 1.66 (IQR: 1.35-2.11). A population density threshold of 22 people/km2 was needed to sustain an outbreak. Counties with greater population density have greater rates of transmission of SARS-CoV-2, likely due to increased contact rates in areas with greater density. An increase in one unit of log population density increased R0 by 0.16 (95% CI: 0.13 to 0.19). This association remained when adjusted for main mode of transportation and household income. The effect of population density on R0 was not modified by transportation mode. Our findings suggest that dense areas increase contact rates necessary for disease transmission. SARS-CoV-2 R0 estimates need to consider this geographic variability for proper planning and resource allocation, particularly as epidemics newly emerge and old outbreaks resurge.
| S-EPMC8059825 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundShortly after the 2020 US election, initial evidence on first-generation COVID-19 vaccines showed 70-95% efficacy and minimal risks. Yet, many US adults expressed reluctance.AimsThe aim of this study was to compare persons willing and unwilling to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and to estimate the effects of vaccination attributes on uptake: proof of vaccination, vaccination setting, effectiveness, duration of immunity, and risk of severe side effects.MethodBetween 9 and 11 November 2020, 1153 US adults completed a discrete choice experiment (DCE) on Phase 2 of the CDC Vaccination Program (August 2021). Each of its eight choice tasks had three vaccination alternatives and "no vaccination for 6 months." An opt-out inflated logit model was estimated to test for respondent differences and attribute effects.ResultsRespondent demographics were unrelated to one's willingness to be vaccinated (p value 0.533), but those with less education were more likely to be unwilling (p < 0.001). Among those willing, uptake ranged from 61.70 to 97.75%, depending on the vaccination attributes. Effectiveness and safety had the largest effects. Offering proof of vaccination and a choice of setting increased uptake as much as increasing immunity from 3 to 6 months.ConclusionsTo maximize uptake, the CDC Program should standardize proof of vaccination and offer a choice of setting, instead of a one-size-fits-all approach. If the first-generation vaccines are efficacious, widely available, and free, overall predicted uptake is 68.81% by the end of Phase 2 (August 2021), which is well below the 75-90% needed for herd immunity. Further health preference research is necessary to uncover and address unwillingness and reluctance to vaccinate against COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8008018 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe gap between the highest and lowest life expectancies for race-county combinations in the United States is over 35 y. We divided the race-county combinations of the US population into eight distinct groups, referred to as the "eight Americas," to explore the causes of the disparities that can inform specific public health intervention policies and programs.Methods and findingsThe eight Americas were defined based on race, location of the county of residence, population density, race-specific county-level per capita income, and cumulative homicide rate. Data sources for population and mortality figures were the Bureau of the Census and the National Center for Health Statistics. We estimated life expectancy, the risk of mortality from specific diseases, health insurance, and health-care utilization for the eight Americas. The life expectancy gap between the 3.4 million high-risk urban black males and the 5.6 million Asian females was 20.7 y in 2001. Within the sexes, the life expectancy gap between the best-off and the worst-off groups was 15.4 y for males (Asians versus high-risk urban blacks) and 12.8 y for females (Asians versus low-income southern rural blacks). Mortality disparities among the eight Americas were largest for young (15-44 y) and middle-aged (45-59 y) adults, especially for men. The disparities were caused primarily by a number of chronic diseases and injuries with well-established risk factors. Between 1982 and 2001, the ordering of life expectancy among the eight Americas and the absolute difference between the advantaged and disadvantaged groups remained largely unchanged. Self-reported health plan coverage was lowest for western Native Americans and low-income southern rural blacks. Crude self-reported health-care utilization, however, was slightly higher for the more disadvantaged populations.ConclusionsDisparities in mortality across the eight Americas, each consisting of millions or tens of millions of Americans, are enormous by all international standards. The observed disparities in life expectancy cannot be explained by race, income, or basic health-care access and utilization alone. Because policies aimed at reducing fundamental socioeconomic inequalities are currently practically absent in the US, health disparities will have to be at least partly addressed through public health strategies that reduce risk factors for chronic diseases and injuries.
| S-EPMC1564165 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since the outbreak of COVID-19, vaccination against the virus has been implemented and has progressed among various groups across all ethnicities, genders, and almost all ages in the United States. This study examines the impacts of socioeconomic status and political preference on COVID-19 vaccination in over 443 counties in the southwestern United States. Regression analysis was used to examine the association between a county’s vaccination rate and one’s personal income, employment status, education, race and ethnicity, age, occupation, residential area, and political preference. The results were as follows: First, counties with higher average personal income tend to have a higher vaccination rate (p < 0.001). Second, county-level vaccination is significantly associated with the percentage of Democrat votes (β = 0.242, p < 0.001). Third, race and ethnicity are vaccine-influencing factors. Counties with more Black residents have lower vaccine acceptance (β = −0.419, p < 0.001), while those where more Hispanics or Native Americans reside are more likely to accept vaccines for health protection (β = 0.202, p < 0.001; β = 0.057, p = 0.008, respectively). Lastly, pertaining to the age difference, seniors aged 65 and older show substantial support for vaccination, followed by the median age group (all p < 0.001).
| S-EPMC9680412 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The geographic areas in the United States most affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have changed over time. On May 7, 2020, CDC, with other federal agencies, began identifying counties with increasing COVID-19 incidence (hotspots) to better understand transmission dynamics and offer targeted support to health departments in affected communities. Data for January 22-July 15, 2020, were analyzed retrospectively (January 22-May 6) and prospectively (May 7-July 15) to detect hotspot counties. No counties met hotspot criteria during January 22-March 7, 2020. During March 8-July 15, 2020, 818 counties met hotspot criteria for ?1 day; these counties included 80% of the U.S. population. The daily number of counties meeting hotspot criteria peaked in early April, decreased and stabilized during mid-April-early June, then increased again during late June-early July. The percentage of counties in the South and West Census regions* meeting hotspot criteria increased from 10% and 13%, respectively, during March-April to 28% and 22%, respectively, during June-July. Identification of community transmission as a contributing factor increased over time, whereas identification of outbreaks in long-term care facilities, food processing facilities, correctional facilities, or other workplaces as contributing factors decreased. Identification of hotspot counties and understanding how they change over time can help prioritize and target implementation of U.S. public health response activities.
| S-EPMC7439980 | biostudies-literature
Project description:(1) Background: Stroke incidence and outcomes are influenced by socioeconomic status. There is a paucity of reported population-level studies regarding these determinants. The goal of this ecological analysis was to determine the county-level associations of social determinants of stroke hospitalization and death rates in the United States. (2) Methods: Publicly available data as of 9 April 2021, for the socioeconomic factors and outcomes, was extracted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The outcomes of interest were "all stroke hospitalization rates per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries" (SHR) and "all stroke death rates per 100,000 population" (SDR). We used a multivariate binomial generalized linear mixed model after converting the outcomes to binary based on their median values. (3) Results: A total of 3226 counties/county-equivalents of the states and territories in the US were analyzed. Heart disease prevalence (odds ratio, OR = 2.03, p < 0.001), blood pressure medication nonadherence (OR = 2.02, p < 0.001), age-adjusted obesity (OR = 1.24, p = 0.006), presence of hospitals with neurological services (OR = 1.9, p < 0.001), and female head of household (OR = 1.32, p = 0.021) were associated with high SHR while cost of care per capita for Medicare patients with heart disease (OR = 0.5, p < 0.01) and presence of hospitals (OR = 0.69, p < 0.025) were associated with low SHR. Median household income (OR = 0.6, p < 0.001) and park access (OR = 0.84, p = 0.016) were associated with low SDR while no college degree (OR = 1.21, p = 0.049) was associated with high SDR. (4) Conclusions: Several socioeconomic factors (e.g., education, income, female head of household) were found to be associated with stroke outcomes. Additional research is needed to investigate intermediate and potentially modifiable factors that can serve as targeted interventions.
| S-EPMC9320068 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic continues to ravage the world, with the United States being highly affected. A vaccine provides the best hope for a permanent solution to controlling the pandemic. However, to be effective, a vaccine must be accepted and used by a large majority of the population. The aim of this study was to understand the attitudes towards and obstacles facing vaccination with a potential COVID-19 vaccine. To measure these attitudes a survey was administered to 316 respondents across the United States by a survey corporation. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the relationships of several factors with attitudes toward potential COVID-19 vaccination. Prior vaccine usage and attitudes predicted attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination. Assessment of the severity of COVID-19 for the United States was also predictive. Approximately 68% of all respondents were supportive of being vaccinated for COVID-19, but side effects, efficacy and length of testing remained concerns. Longer testing, increased efficacy and development in the United States were significantly associated with increased vaccine acceptance. Messages promoting COVID-19 vaccination should seek to alleviate the concerns of those who are already vaccine-hesitant. Messaging directed at the benefits of vaccination for the United States as a country would address the second predictive factor. Enough time should be taken to allay concerns about both short- and long-term side effects before a vaccine is released.
| S-EPMC7711655 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Global vaccine development efforts have been accelerated in response to the devastating COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the impact of a 2-dose COVID-19 vaccination campaign on reducing incidence, hospitalizations, and deaths in the United States (US). We developed an agent-based model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and parameterized it with US demographics and age-specific COVID-19 outcomes. Healthcare workers and high-risk individuals were prioritized for vaccination, while children under 18 years of age were not vaccinated. We considered a vaccine efficacy of 95% against disease following 2 doses administered 21 days apart achieving 40% vaccine coverage of the overall population within 284 days. We varied vaccine efficacy against infection, and specified 10% pre-existing population immunity for the base-case scenario. The model was calibrated to an effective reproduction number of 1.2, accounting for current non-pharmaceutical interventions in the US. Vaccination reduced the overall attack rate to 4.6% (95% CrI: 4.3% - 5.0%) from 9.0% (95% CrI: 8.4% - 9.4%) without vaccination, over 300 days. The highest relative reduction (54-62%) was observed among individuals aged 65 and older. Vaccination markedly reduced adverse outcomes, with non-ICU hospitalizations, ICU hospitalizations, and deaths decreasing by 63.5% (95% CrI: 60.3% - 66.7%), 65.6% (95% CrI: 62.2% - 68.6%), and 69.3% (95% CrI: 65.5% - 73.1%), respectively, across the same period. Our results indicate that vaccination can have a substantial impact on mitigating COVID-19 outbreaks, even with limited protection against infection. However, continued compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions is essential to achieve this impact.
| S-EPMC7709178 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRecommendations for additional doses of COVID vaccine are restricted to people with HIV who have advanced disease or unsuppressed HIV viral load. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 infection risk post-vaccination among PWH is essential for informing vaccination guidelines.ObjectiveEstimate the risk of breakthrough infections among fully vaccinated people with (PWH) and without (PWoH) HIV in the US.Design setting and participantsThe Corona-Infectious-Virus Epidemiology Team (CIVET)-II cohort collaboration consists of 4 longitudinal cohorts from integrated health systems and academic health centers. Each cohort identified individuals ≥18 years old, in-care, and fully vaccinated for COVID-19 through 30 June 2021. PWH were matched to PWoH on date fully vaccinated, age group, race/ethnicity, and sex at birth. Incidence rates per 1,000 person-years and cumulative incidence of breakthrough infections with 95% confidence intervals ([,]) were estimated by HIV status. Cox proportional hazards models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) of breakthrough infections by HIV status adjusting for demographic factors, prior COVID-19 illness, vaccine type (BNT162b2, [Pfizer], mRNA-1273 [Moderna], Jansen Ad26.COV2.S [J&J]), calendar time, and cohort. Risk factors for breakthroughs among PWH, were also investigated.ExposureHIV infection.OutcomeCOVID-19 breakthrough infections, defined as laboratory evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 diagnosis after an individual was fully vaccinated.ResultsAmong 109,599 individuals (31,840 PWH and 77,759 PWoH), the rate of breakthrough infections was higher in PWH versus PWoH: 44 [41, 48] vs. 31 [29, 33] per 1,000 person-years. Cumulative incidence at 210 days after date fully vaccinated was low, albeit higher in PWH versus PWoH overall (2.8% versus 2.1%, log-rank p<0.001, risk difference=0.7% [0.4%, 1.0%]) and within each vaccine type. Breakthrough infection risk was 41% higher in PWH versus PWoH (aHR=1.41 [1.28, 1.56]). Among PWH, younger age (18-24 versus 45-54), history of COVID-19 prior to fully vaccinated date, and J&J vaccination (versus Pfizer) were associated with increased risk of breakthroughs. There was no association of breakthrough with HIV viral load suppression or CD4 count among PWH.Conclusions and relevanceCOVID-19 vaccination is effective against infection with SARS-CoV-2 strains circulating through 30 Sept 2021. PWH have an increased risk of breakthrough infections compared to PWoH. Recommendations for additional vaccine doses should be expanded to all PWH.
| S-EPMC8669858 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesNational data on COVID-19 vaccination coverage among pregnant women are limited. We assessed COVID-19 vaccination coverage and intent, factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination, reasons for nonvaccination, and knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs related to COVID-19 illness and vaccination among pregnant women in the United States.MethodsData from an opt-in internet panel survey of pregnant women conducted March 31-April 16, 2021, assessed receipt of ≥1 dose of any COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy. The sample included 1516 women pregnant any time during December 1, 2020-April 16, 2021, who were not fully vaccinated before pregnancy. We used multivariable logistic regression to determine variables independently associated with receipt of COVID-19 vaccine.ResultsAs of April 16, 2021, 21.7% of pregnant women had received ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy, 24.0% intended to receive a vaccine, 17.2% were unsure, and 37.1% did not intend to receive a vaccine. Pregnant women with (vs without) a health care provider recommendation (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 4.86), those who lived (vs not) with someone with a condition that could increase risk for serious medical complications of COVID-19 (aPR = 2.11), and those who had received (vs not) an influenza vaccination (aPR = 2.35) were more likely to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Common reasons for nonvaccination included concerns about safety risk to baby (37.2%) or self (34.6%) and about rapid vaccine development (29.7%) and approval (30.9%).ConclusionsOur findings indicate a continued need to emphasize the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and to widely disseminate the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other clinical professional societies for all pregnant women to be vaccinated.
| S-EPMC9357823 | biostudies-literature