Conditional cash lotteries increase COVID-19 vaccination rates.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Barber A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8685289 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9258773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancy seems to be universal across countries and subgroups, and so are its determinants. We studied the willingness and factors associated with the decision to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in healthcare workers (HCW) in a Spanish tertiary hospital. Furthermore, we compared the percentage of willingness to vaccinate against COVID with actual vaccination rates among HCW in our hospital.MethodsFrom December 21, 2020 to January 4, 2021, before initiation of the COVID-19 HCW vaccination campaign at Germans Trias i Pujol University Hospital (HUGTiP), an anonymous self-administered questionnaire was administered to HCW. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression of the association of variables with the outcome "intention to receive the COVID-19 vaccine as soon as possible" was conducted. Vaccination rates were extracted from the hospital information systems.ResultsForty-four percent of HCW included in the study declared a willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible. This was associated with male sex [1.66 (95%CI 1.13-2.43); p = 0.009], older age [1.02 (95%CI 1.00-1.03); p = 0.014], belonging to the occupational groups "physician" or "other" [5.76 (95%CI 3.44-9.63) and 2.15 (95%CI 1.25-3.70); p<0.001], respectively, and reporting influenza vaccination during the last three seasons or at least one of the last three seasons [3.84 (95%CI 2.56-5.75) and 2.49 (95%CI 1.71-3.63); p<0.001]. One in ten hospital workers reported they were unwilling to receive COVID-19 vaccination. Actual COVID-19 vaccination uptake among HCW was higher (80.4%) than the percentage of willingness to vaccinate estimated from the questionnaire. Physicians not only had the highest vaccination rate, but also the highest correlation between the reported intention to vaccinate and the final decision to receive COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccination uptake was higher than previously estimated according to the stated intentions of HCW. Doubts and fears must be addressed, particularly in persons less inclined to be vaccinated: females, younger people and those not vaccinated against influenza in recent seasons. The study of barriers and strategies aimed at promoting COVID-19 vaccination must be adapted in relation to occupational groups' attitudes, understanding their idiosyncrasies with respect to this and other vaccines.
| S-EPMC8432869 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHomicide kills more people than war globally and is associated with income inequality. In Brazil, one of the most unequal countries of the world, the homicide rate is four times higher than the world average. Establishing if the Brazilian conditional cash transfer programme [Bolsa Familia Programme (BFP)], the largest in the world, is associated with a reduction in the rate of homicide is relevant for violence prevention programs. We aimed to assess the effect of BFP coverage on homicide and hospitalization rates from violence.MethodsBFP coverage and rates of homicide (overall and disaggregated by sex and age) and hospitalizations from violence from all 5,507 Brazilian municipalities between 2004 and 2012 were explored using multivariable negative binomial regression models with fixed effect for panel data. Robustness of results was explored using sensitivity analyses such as difference-in-difference models.FindingsHomicide rates and hospitalization from violence decreased as BFP coverage in the target population increased. For each percent increase in the uptake of the BFP, the homicide rate decreased by 0.3% (Rate Ratio:0.997; 95%CI:0.996-0.997) and hospitalizations from violence by 0.4% (RR: 0.996;95%CI:0.995-0.996). Rates of homicide and hospitalizations from violence were also negatively associated with the duration of BFP coverage. When, coverage of the target population was at least 70% for one-year, hospitalizations from violence decreased by 8%; two-years 14%, three-years 20%, and four years 25%.InterpretationOur results support the hypothesis that conditional cash transfer programs might have as an additional benefit the prevention of homicides and hospitalizations from violence. Social protection interventions could contribute to decrease levels of violence in low-and-middle-income-countries through reducing poverty and/or socioeconomic inequalities.
| S-EPMC6312285 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As COVID-19 adversely affects patients with cancer, prophylactic strategies are critically needed. Using a validated antibody assay against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, we determined a high seroconversion rate (94%) in 200 patients with cancer in New York City that had received full dosing with one of the FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines. On comparison with solid tumors (98%), a significantly lower rate of seroconversion was observed in patients with hematologic malignancies (85%), particularly recipients following highly immunosuppressive therapies such as anti-CD20 therapies (70%) and stem cell transplantation (73%). Patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy (97%) or hormonal therapies (100%) demonstrated high seroconversion post vaccination. Patients with prior COVID-19 infection demonstrated higher anti-spike IgG titers post vaccination. Relatively lower IgG titers were observed following vaccination with the adenoviral than with mRNA-based vaccines. These data demonstrate generally high immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccination in oncology patients and identify immunosuppressed cohorts that need novel vaccination or passive immunization strategies.
| S-EPMC8179248 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines is a tremendous scientific response to the current global pandemic. However, vaccines per se do not save lives and restart economies. Their success depends on the number of people getting vaccinated. We used a survey experiment to examine the impact on vaccine intentions of a variety of public health messages identified as particularly promising: three messages that emphasize different benefits from the vaccines (personal health, the health of others, and the recovery of local and national economies) and one message that emphasizes vaccine safety. Because people will likely be exposed to multiple messages in the real world, we also examined the effect of these messages in combination. Based on a nationally quota representative sample of 3,048 adults in the United States, our findings suggest that several forms of public messages can increase vaccine intentions, but messaging that emphasizes personal health benefits had the largest impact.
| S-EPMC8364198 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImmunization is one of the most effective ways of preventing illness, disability and death from infectious diseases for older people. However, worldwide immunization rates are still low, particularly for the most vulnerable groups within the elderly population. The objective of this study was to estimate the effect of the Oportunidades -an incentive-based poverty alleviation program- on vaccination coverage for poor and rural older people in Mexico.MethodsCross-sectional study, based on 2007 Oportunidades Evaluation Survey, conducted in low-income households from 741 rural communities (localities with <2,500 inhabitants) of 13 Mexican states. Vaccination coverage was defined according to three individual vaccines: tetanus, influenza and pneumococcal, and for complete vaccination schedule. Propensity score matching and linear probability model were used in order to estimate the Oportunidades effect.Results12,146 older people were interviewed, and 7% presented cognitive impairment. Among remaining, 4,628 were matched. Low coverage rates were observed for the vaccines analyzed. For Oportunidades and non-Oportunidades populations were 46% and 41% for influenza, 52% and 45% for pneumococcal disease, and 79% and 71% for tetanus, respectively. Oportunidades effect was significant in increasing the proportion of older people vaccinated: for complete schedule 5.5% (CI95% 2.8-8.3), for influenza 6.9% (CI95% 3.8-9.6), for pneumococcal 7.2% (CI95% 4.3-10.2), and for tetanus 6.6% (CI95% 4.1-9.2).ConclusionsThe results of this study extend the evidence on the effect that conditional transfer programs exert on health indicators. In particular, Oportunidades increased vaccination rates in the population of older people. There is a need to continue raising vaccination rates, however, particularly for the most vulnerable older people.
| S-EPMC3711738 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeCOVID-19 mortality rates are higher in rural versus urban areas in the United States, threatening to exacerbate the existing rural mortality penalty. To save lives and facilitate economic recovery, we must achieve widespread vaccination coverage. This study compared adult COVID-19 vaccination rates across the US rural-urban continuum and across different types of rural counties.MethodsWe retrieved vaccination rates as of August 11, 2021, for adults aged 18+ for the 2,869 counties for which data were available from the CDC. We merged these with county-level data on demographic and socioeconomic composition, health care infrastructure, 2020 Trump vote share, and USDA labor market type. We then used regression models to examine predictors of COVID-19 vaccination rates across the USDA's 9-category rural-urban continuum codes and separately within rural counties by labor market type.FindingsAs of August 11, 45.8% of adults in rural counties had been fully vaccinated, compared to 59.8% in urban counties. In unadjusted regression models, average rates declined monotonically with increasing rurality. Lower rural rates are explained by a combination of lower educational attainment and higher Trump vote share. Within rural counties, rates are lowest in farming and mining-dependent counties and highest in recreation-dependent counties, with differences explained by a combination of educational attainment, health care infrastructure, and Trump vote share.ConclusionLower vaccination rates in rural areas is concerning given higher rural COVID-19 mortality rates and recent surges in cases. At this point, mandates may be the most effective strategy for increasing vaccination rates.
| S-EPMC8661570 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRandomized clinical trials and observational studies have demonstrated high overall effectiveness for the three US-authorized COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic COVID-19 infection. Nevertheless, the challenges associated with the use of observational data can undermine the results of the studies.ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of using observational data for vaccine effectiveness studies by examining granular weekly effectiveness.Design settings and participantsIn this retrospective cohort study, we used Columbia University Medical Center data linked to State and City Immunization Registries to assess the weekly effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted manual chart review of cases in week one in both groups along with a set of sensitivity analyses for Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Janssen vaccines.Main outcomes and measuresWe used propensity score matching with up to 54,987 covariates and fitted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios and constructed Kaplan-Meier plots for two main outcomes (COVID-19 infection and COVID-19-associated hospitalization).ResultsThe study included 179,666 patients. We observed increasing effectiveness after the first dose of mRNA vaccines with week 6 effectiveness approximating 84% (95% CI 72-91%) for COVID-19 infection and 86% (95% CI 69-95) for COVID-19-associated hospitalization. When analyzing unexpectedly high effectiveness in week one, chart review revealed that vaccinated patients are less likely to seek care after vaccination and are more likely to be diagnosed with COVID-19 during the encounters for other conditions. Sensitivity analyses showed potential outcome misclassification for COVID-19 ICD10-CM diagnosis and the influence of excluding patients with prior COVID-19 infection and anchoring in the unexposed group. Overall vaccine effectiveness analysis in fully vaccinated patients matched the results of the randomized trials.Conclusions and relevanceObservational data can be used to ascertain vaccine effectiveness if potential biases are accounted for. The data need to be scrutinized to ensure that compared groups exhibit similar health seeking behavior and are equally likely to be captured in the data. Given the difference in temporal trends of vaccine exposure and baseline characteristics, indirect comparison of vaccines may produce biased results.Key pointsQuestion: When accounted for all potential biases, what is the weekly effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines?Findings: In this cohort study we replicated the results of randomized clinical trials, discovered plausible increase in effectiveness after week one following the first dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and found differences in temporal trends of vaccine exposure and baseline characteristics in vaccinated groups.Meaning: Observational data can be used to reliably estimate vaccine effectiveness if the biases are accounted for. Vaccines need to be directly compared.
| S-EPMC8722616 | 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:We used the COVID-19 Community Vulnerability Index and 7 theme scores to assess associations between vulnerability and county-level COVID-19 vaccination (n = 2415 counties) through May 25th, 2021. When comparing vaccination rates among quintiles of CCVI scores, Theme 3 (housing type, transportation, household composition, and disability) was associated with the largest disparity, with the least vulnerable counties (Q1) having 33% higher rates of vaccination among individuals aged 18+ (53.5% vs 40.2%) compared to counties with the highest vulnerability (Q5). Using generalized linear models with binomial distributions and log links, we found that a 10-point increase in the CCVI index, socioeconomic vulnerability, housing type and composition, and epidemiological factors were associated with at least a 1.0 percentage point decline in county-level vaccination. The association between community vulnerability and lower vaccination rates suggests the need for continued efforts for equitable COVID-19 vaccination across marginalized communities.
| S-EPMC8215509 | biostudies-literature