RESUMO
Background@#Owing to limited experience with the new vaccine platforms, discussion of vaccine safety is inevitable. However, media coverage of adverse events of special interest could influence the vaccination rate; thus, evaluating the outcomes of adverse events of special interest influencing vaccine administration is crucial. @*Methods@#We conducted regression discontinuity in time analysis to calculate the local average treatment effect (LATE) using datasets from Our World in Data and Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering. For the United States, the United Kingdom, and Europe, the cutoff points were April 23rd and June 23rd, April 7th, and the 14th week of 2021, respectively. @*Results@#The LATE of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meeting held on April 23rd was −0.249 for all vaccines, −0.133 (−0.189 to −0.076) for Pfizer, −0.064 (−0.115 to −0.012) for Moderna, and −0.038 (−0.047 to −0.030) for Johnson & Johnson. Discontinuities were observed for all three types of vaccines in the United States. The June 23rd meeting of the ACIP (mRNA vaccines and myocarditis) did not convene any discontinuities. Furthermore, there was no significant drop in the weekly average vaccination rates in Europe following the European Medicines Agency (EMA) statement on April 7th. Conversely, there was a significant drop in the first-dose vaccination rates in the United Kingdom related to the EMA report. The first-dose vaccination rate for all vaccines changed by −0.104 (−0.176 to −0.032). @*Conclusion@#Although monitoring and reporting of adverse events of special interest are important, a careful approach towards public announcements is warranted.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To assess the effect of applying an automated heart model based measurements of left ventricle (LV) and compare with manual and semi-automated measurements at Cardiovascular MR Imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients who underwent cardiac 1.5T MR imaging were included. Steady state free precession cine images of 20 phases per cardiac cycle were obtained in short axis views and both 2-chamber and 4-chamber views. Epicardial and endocardial contours were drawn in manual, automated, and semi-automated ways. Based on these acquired contour sets, the end-diastolic (ED) and end-systolic (ES) volumes, ejection fraction (EF), systolic volume (SV) and LV mass were calculated and compared. RESULTS: In EDV and ESV, the differences among three measurement methods were not statistically significant (P = .399 and .145, respectively). However, in EF, SV, and LV mass, the differences were statistically significant (P=.001, <001, <001, respectively) and the measured value from automated method tend to be consistently higher than the values from other two methods. CONCLUSION: An automatic heart model-based method grossly overestimate EF, SV and LV mass compared with manual or semi-automated methods. Even though the method saves a considerable amount of efforts, further manual adjustment should be considered in critical clinical cases.