Dataset Information

COVID-19 outbreak, herd immunity formation, and future public health strategies.

ABSTRACT: In Korea, where the successful control of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic have been implemented by the follow-up survey management (containment) of COVID-19-infected persons, the number of infected persons has increased rapidly, and a re-epidemic trend is emerging. The Korean government is strengthening epidemic prevention activities, such as increasing the social distance in the metropolitan area to four levels and increasing the vaccination rate. The public has been complaining of dissatisfaction with the atrophy of socioeconomic activities and of distrust of epidemic prevention policies. Australia started with an incidence similar to that of Korea, but its social activities are more flexible than those of Korea, where the incidence is maintained at approximately 0.1 per 100,000 people. In comparing the differences between both countries in terms of the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker Stringency Index, it was found that Australia effectively regulates the number of infected cases by high-intensity intermittent mitigation and the subsequent allowance of social activities. Korea has also recommended a high-intensity intermittent mitigation policy as in Australia until community herd immunity via vaccination is formed.

SUBMITTER: Kim Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8666682 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceDiscovery of effective vaccines and increased confidence that infection confers extended protection against coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have renewed discussion of using immunity certificates or 'passports' to selectively reduce ongoing public health restrictions.ObjectiveTo determine public views regarding government and private conferral of immunity privileges.Design and settingNational on-line survey fielded in June 2020. Participants were randomly asked about either government 'passports' or private 'certificates' for COVID-19 immunity.ParticipantsAdults from a standing panel maintained for academic research, selected to approximate national demographics.Main outcomes/measuresLevel of support/opposition to immunity privileges, and whether views vary based on: government vs. private adoption; demographics; political affiliation or views; or various COVID19-related attitudes and experiences.ResultsOf 1315 respondents, 45.2% supported immunity privileges, with slightly more favoring private certificates than government passports (48.1% vs 42.6%, p = 0.04). Support was greater for using passports or certificates to enable returns to high-risk jobs or attendance at large recreational events than for returning to work generally. Levels of support did not vary significantly according to age groups, socioeconomic or employment status, urbanicity, political affiliation or views, or whether the respondent had chronic disease(s). However, estimates from adjusted analyses showed less support among women (odds ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.51 to 0.80), and among Hispanics (0.56; 0.40 to 0.78) and other minorities (0.58; 0.40 to 0.85) compared with whites, but not among blacks (0.83; 0.60 to 1.15). Support was much higher among those who personally wanted a passport or certificate (75.6% vs 24.4%) and much lower among those who believed this would harm the social fabric of their community (22.9% vs 77.1%).Conclusions and relevancePublic views are divided on both government or private uses of immunity certificates, but, prior to any efforts to politicize the issues, these views did not vary along usual political lines or by characteristics that indicate individual vulnerability to infection. Social consensus on the desirability of an immunity privileges programs may be difficult to achieve.

Dataset Information

COVID-19 outbreak, herd immunity formation, and future public health strategies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure