Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Vaccine ; 41(20): 3204-3214, 2023 05 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2293904

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Vaccine hesitancy presents a challenge to COVID-19 control efforts. To identify beliefs associated with delayed vaccine uptake, we developed and implemented a vaccine hesitancy survey for the COVID-19 Community Research Partnership. METHODS: In June 2021, we assessed attitudes and beliefs associated with COVID-19 vaccination using an online survey. Self-reported vaccination data were requested daily through October 2021. We compared responses between vaccinated and unvaccinated respondents using absolute standardized mean differences (ASMD). We assessed validity and reliability using exploratory factor analysis and identified latent factors associated with a subset of survey items. Cox proportional hazards models and mediation analyses assessed predictors of subsequent vaccination among those initially unvaccinated. RESULTS: In June 2021, 29,522 vaccinated and 1,272 unvaccinated participants completed surveys. Among those unvaccinated in June 2021, 559 (43.9 %) became vaccinated by October 31, 2021. In June, unvaccinated participants were less likely to feel "very concerned" about getting COVID-19 than vaccinated participants (10.6 % vs. 43.3 %, ASMD 0.792). Among those initially unvaccinated, greater intent to become vaccinated was associated with getting vaccinated and shorter time to vaccination. However, even among participants who reported no intention to become vaccinated, 28.5 % reported vaccination before study end. Two latent factors predicted subsequent vaccination-being 'more receptive' was derived from motivation to protect one's own or others' health and resume usual activities; being 'less receptive' was derived from concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. In a Cox model, both factors were partially mediated by vaccination intention. CONCLUSION: This study characterizes vaccine hesitant individuals and identifies predictors of eventual COVID-19 vaccination through October 31, 2021. Even individuals with no intention to be vaccinated can shift to vaccine uptake. Our data suggest factors of perceived severity of COVID-19 disease, vaccine safety, and trust in the vaccine development process are predictive of vaccination and may be important opportunities for ongoing interventions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , Prospective Studies , Reproducibility of Results , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination
2.
Vaccine ; 2023.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2256343

ABSTRACT

Introduction Vaccine hesitancy presents a challenge to COVID-19 control efforts. To identify beliefs associated with delayed vaccine uptake, we developed and implemented a vaccine hesitancy survey for the COVID-19 Community Research Partnership. Methods In June 2021, we assessed attitudes and beliefs associated with COVID-19 vaccination using an online survey. Self-reported vaccination data were requested daily through October 2021. We compared responses between vaccinated and unvaccinated respondents using absolute standardized mean differences (ASMD). We assessed validity and reliability using exploratory factor analysis and identified latent factors associated with a subset of survey items. Cox proportional hazards models and mediation analyses assessed predictors of subsequent vaccination among those initially unvaccinated. Results In June 2021, 29,522 vaccinated and 1,272 unvaccinated participants completed surveys. Among those unvaccinated in June 2021, 559 (43.9%) became vaccinated by October 31, 2021. In June, unvaccinated participants were less likely to feel "very concerned” about getting COVID-19 than vaccinated participants (10.6% vs. 43.3%, ASMD 0.792). Among those initially unvaccinated, greater intent to become vaccinated was associated with getting vaccinated and shorter time to vaccination. However, even among participants who reported no intention to become vaccinated, 28.5% reported vaccination before study end. Two latent factors predicted subsequent vaccination—being ‘more receptive' was derived from motivation to protect one's own or others' health and resume usual activities;being ‘less receptive' was derived from concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. In a Cox model, both factors were partially mediated by vaccination intention. Conclusion This study characterizes vaccine hesitant individuals and identifies predictors of eventual COVID-19 vaccination through October 31, 2021. Even individuals with no intention to be vaccinated can shift to vaccine uptake. Our data suggest factors of perceived severity of COVID-19 disease, vaccine safety, and trust in the vaccine development process are predictive of vaccination and may be important opportunities for ongoing interventions.

3.
EBioMedicine ; 86: 104375, 2022 Nov 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2122423

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Immunity to mosquito salivary proteins could provide protection against multiple mosquito-borne diseases and significantly impact public health. We evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of AGS-v PLUS, a mosquito salivary peptide vaccine, in healthy adults 18-50 years old. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 1 study of AGS-v PLUS administered subcutaneously on Days 1 and 22 at the Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. Participants were block randomized 1:1:1:1:1 to two doses saline placebo, two doses AGS-v PLUS, AGS-v PLUS/ISA-51 and saline placebo, two doses AGS-v PLUS/ISA-51, or two doses AGS-v PLUS/Alhydrogel. Primary endpoints were safety (all participants receiving ≥1 injection) and antibody and cytokine responses (all participants with day 43 samples), analysed by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Between 26 August 2019 and 25 February 2020, 51 participants were enrolled and randomized, 11 into the single dose AGS-v PLUS/ISA-51 group and ten in other groups. Due to COVID-19, 15 participants did not return for day 43 samplings. Participants experienced no treatment-emergent or serious adverse events. All solicited symptoms in 2/10 placebo recipients and 22/41 AGS-v PLUS recipients after dose one and 1/10 placebo recipients and 22/41 AGS-v PLUS recipients after dose two were mild/moderate except for one severe fever the day after vaccination (placebo group). Only injection site pain was more common in vaccine groups (15/51 after dose 1 and 11/51 after dose 2) versus placebo. Compared to placebo, all vaccine groups had significantly greater fold change in anti-AGS-v PLUS IgG and IFN-É£ from baseline. INTERPRETATION: AGS-v PLUS had favourable safety profile and induced robust immune responses. Next steps will determine if findings translate into clinical efficacy against mosquito-borne diseases. FUNDING: UK Department of Health and Social Care.

4.
Vaccine ; 40(42): 6133-6140, 2022 10 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2031731

ABSTRACT

Well-regulated clinical trials have shown FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines to be immunogenic and highly efficacious. We evaluated seroconversion rates in adults reporting ≥ 1 dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in a cohort study of nearly 8000 adults residing in North Carolina to validate immunogenicity using a novel approach: at-home, participant administered point-of-care testing. Overall, 91.4% had documented seroconversion within 75 days of first vaccination (median: 31 days). Participants who were older and male participants were less likely to seroconvert (adults aged 41-65: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.69 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64, 0.73], adults aged 66-95: aHR 0.55 [95% CI: 0.50, 0.60], compared to those 18-40; males: aHR 0.92 [95% CI: 0.87, 0.98], compared to females). Participants with evidence of prior infection were more likely to seroconvert than those without (aHR 1.50 [95% CI: 1.19, 1.88]) and those receiving BNT162b2 were less likely to seroconvert compared to those receiving mRNA-1273 (aHR 0.84 [95% CI: 0.79, 0.90]). Reporting at least one new symptom after first vaccination did not affect time to seroconversion, but participants reporting at least one new symptom after second vaccination were more likely to seroconvert (aHR 1.11 [95% CI: 1.05, 1.17]). This data demonstrates the high community-level immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines, albeit with notable differences in older adults, and feasibility of using at-home, participant administered point-of-care testing for community cohort monitoring. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04342884.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Aged , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Male , North Carolina/epidemiology , RNA, Messenger , Seroconversion
5.
J Infect Dis ; 226(2): 225-235, 2022 08 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1730680

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Transmission rates after exposure to a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-positive individual within households and healthcare settings varies significantly between studies. Variability in the extent of exposure and community SARS-CoV-2 incidence may contribute to differences in observed rates. METHODS: We examined risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection in a randomized controlled trial of hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis. Study procedures included standardized questionnaires at enrollment and daily self-collection of midturbinate swabs for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction testing. County-level incidence was modeled using federally sourced data. Relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: Eighty-six of 567 (15.2%) household/social contacts and 12 of 122 (9.8%) healthcare worker contacts acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection. Exposure to 2 suspected index cases (vs 1) significantly increased risk for both household/social contacts (relative risk [RR], 1.86) and healthcare workers (RR, 8.18). Increased contact time also increased risk for healthcare workers (3-12 hours: RR, 7.82, >12 hours: RR, 11.81, vs ≤2 hours), but not for household/social contacts. County incidence did not impact risk. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, increased exposure to SARS-CoV-2 within household or healthcare settings led to higher risk of infection, but elevated community incidence did not. This reinforces the importance of interventions to decrease transmission in close contact settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Post-Exposure Prophylaxis , Risk Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL