Temporal trends and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine series initiation after recent pregnancy.

During the rapid deployment of COVID-19 vaccines in 2021, safety concerns may have led some pregnant individuals to postpone vaccination until after giving birth. This study aimed to describe temporal patterns and factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine series initiation after recent pregnancy in Ontario, Canada. Using the provincial birth registry linked with the COVID-19 vaccine database, we identified all individuals who gave birth between January 1 and December 31, 2021, and had not yet been vaccinated by the end of pregnancy, and followed them to June 30, 2022 (follow-up ranged from 6 to 18 months). We used cumulative incidence curves to describe COVID-19 vaccine initiation after pregnancy and assessed associations with sociodemographic, pregnancy-related, and health behavioral factors using Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Among 137,198 individuals who gave birth in 2021, 87,376 (63.7%) remained unvaccinated at the end of pregnancy; of these, 65.0% initiated COVID-19 vaccination by June 30, 2022. Lower maternal age (<25 vs. 30-34 y aHR: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.70-0.77), smoking during pregnancy (vs. nonsmoking aHR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.65-0.72), lower neighborhood income (lowest quintile vs. highest aHR: 0.79, 95%CI: 0.76-0.83), higher material deprivation (highest quintile vs. lowest aHR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.70-0.79), and exclusive breastfeeding (vs. other feeding aHR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.79-0.84) were associated with lower likelihood of vaccine initiation. Among unvaccinated individuals who gave birth in 2021, COVID-19 vaccine initiation after pregnancy reached 65% by June 30, 2022, suggesting persistent issues with vaccine hesitancy and/or access to vaccination in this population.

Methodological changes implemented over time to support accurate and timely COVID-19 vaccine coverage estimates: Ontario, Canada.

The COVID-19 vaccination program implementation in Ontario, Canada has spanned multiple years and is ongoing. To meet the challenges of the program, Ontario developed and implemented a new electronic COVID-19 immunization registry, COVaxON, which captures individual-level data on all doses administered in the province enabling comprehensive coverage assessment. However, the need for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine coverage assessments over a multi-year vaccination program posed challenges necessitating methodological changes. This paper describes Ontario's COVID-19 immunization registry, the methods implemented over time to allow for the ongoing assessment of vaccine coverage by age, and the impact of those methodological changes. Throughout the course of the vaccination program, four different methodological approaches were used to calculate age-specific coverage estimates using vaccination data (numerator) obtained from COVaxON. Age-specific numerators were initially calculated using age at time of first dose (method A), but were updated to the age at coverage assessment (method B). Database enhancements allowed for the exclusion of deceased individuals from the numerator (method C). Population data (denominator) was updated to 2022 projections from the 2021 national census following their availability (method D). The impact was most evident in older age groups where vaccine uptake was high. For example, coverage estimates for individuals aged 70-79 years of age for at least one dose decreased from 104.9 % (method B) to 95.0 % (method D). Thus, methodological changes improved estimates such that none exceeded 100 %. Ontario's COVID-19 immunization registry has been transformational for vaccine program surveillance. The implementation of a single registry for COVID-19 vaccines was essential for comprehensive near real-time coverage assessment, and enabled new uses of the data to support additional components of vaccine program surveillance. The province is well positioned to build on what has been achieved as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and expand the registry to other routine vaccination programs.

Effectiveness and Duration of Protection of a Fourth Dose of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine among Long-Term Care Residents in Ontario, Canada.

We estimated the effectiveness of a fourth dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine against Omicron infections and severe outcomes over time among long-term care residents in Ontario, Canada. Fourth doses provide additional protection against Omicron-related outcomes, but the protection wanes over time, with more waning seen against infection than severe outcomes.

Mental Health, Material Possessions, and Social Capital During COVID-19: A Study of the United States Urban Working-Age Population.

This study evaluates the associations between the urban working-age population's mental health, material possession, and social capital during the COVID-19 pandemic. The specific stressors examined in this empirical analysis are income level, food insecurity, and virtual psychological support. This paper further examines the differences across the employed and unemployed population groups. We obtained data from the COVID-19 Household Impact Survey and constructed four measures of mental health conditions: Nervous, Depressed, Lonely, and Hopeless. Our empirical analyses use an ordinal regression model that takes both time and regional factors into consideration to control for potential time effects and time-invariant confounders that only vary between regions. For the employed group, the main results suggest that lower income and food insecurity is correlated with a higher frequency of mental health symptoms, while virtual psychological support predicts a better mental health status. For the unemployed group, food insecurity is negatively associated with mental health, and virtual psychological might help alleviate nervousness and depression.

COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Against Omicron Infection and Hospitalization

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to provide real-world evidence on coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic infection and severe outcomes caused by Omicron in children aged 5 to 11 years. METHODS: We used the test-negative study design and linked provincial databases to estimate BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection and severe outcomes caused by Omicron in children aged 5 to 11 years between January 2 and August 27, 2022 in Ontario. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate VE by time since the latest dose, compared with unvaccinated children, and we evaluated VE by dosing interval. RESULTS: We included 6284 test-positive cases and 8389 test-negative controls. VE against symptomatic infection declined from 24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8% to 36%) 14 to 29 days after a first dose and 66% (95% CI, 60% to 71%) 7 to 29 days after 2 doses. VE was higher for children with dosing intervals of ≥56 days (57% [95% CI, 51% to 62%]) than 15 to 27 days (12% [95% CI, - 11% to 30%]) and 28 to 41 days (38% [95% CI, 28% to 47%]), but appeared to wane over time for all dosing interval groups. VE against severe outcomes was 94% (95% CI, 57% to 99%) 7 to 29 days after 2 doses and declined to 57% (95%CI, -20% to 85%) after ≥120 days. CONCLUSIONS: In children aged 5 to 11 years, 2 doses of BNT162b2 provide moderate protection against symptomatic Omicron infection within 4 months of vaccination and good protection against severe outcomes. Protection wanes more rapidly for infection than severe outcomes. Overall, longer dosing intervals confer higher protection against symptomatic infection, however protection decreases and becomes similar to shorter dosing interval starting 90 days after vaccination.

Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine booster doses against Omicron severe outcomes.

We estimated the effectiveness of booster doses of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against Omicron-associated severe outcomes among adults in Ontario, Canada. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalization or death among SARS-CoV-2-tested adults aged ≥50 years from January 2 to October 1, 2022, stratified by age and time since vaccination. We also compared VE during BA.1/BA.2 and BA.4/BA.5 sublineage predominance. We included 11,160 cases and 62,880 tests for test-negative controls. Depending on the age group, compared to unvaccinated adults, VE was 91-98% 7-59 days after a third dose, waned to 76-87% after ≥240 days, was restored to 92-97% 7-59 days after a fourth dose, and waned to 86-89% after ≥120 days. VE was lower and declined faster during BA.4/BA.5 versus BA.1/BA.2 predominance, particularly after ≥120 days. Here we show that booster doses of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines restored strong protection against severe outcomes for at least 3 months after vaccination. Across the entire study period, protection declined slightly over time, but waned more during BA.4/BA.5 predominance.

COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Against Omicron Infection and Hospitalization.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to provide real-world evidence on coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic infection and severe outcomes caused by Omicron in children aged 5 to 11 years. METHODS: We used the test-negative study design and linked provincial databases to estimate BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection and severe outcomes caused by Omicron in children aged 5 to 11 years between January 2 and August 27, 2022 in Ontario. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate VE by time since the latest dose, compared with unvaccinated children, and we evaluated VE by dosing interval. RESULTS: We included 6284 test-positive cases and 8389 test-negative controls. VE against symptomatic infection declined from 24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8% to 36%) 14 to 29 days after a first dose and 66% (95% CI, 60% to 71%) 7 to 29 days after 2 doses. VE was higher for children with dosing intervals of ≥56 days (57% [95% CI, 51% to 62%]) than 15 to 27 days (12% [95% CI, -11% to 30%]) and 28 to 41 days (38% [95% CI, 28% to 47%]), but appeared to wane over time for all dosing interval groups. VE against severe outcomes was 94% (95% CI, 57% to 99%) 7 to 29 days after 2 doses and declined to 57% (95%CI, -20% to 85%) after ≥120 days. CONCLUSIONS: In children aged 5 to 11 years, 2 doses of BNT162b2 provide moderate protection against symptomatic Omicron infection within 4 months of vaccination and good protection against severe outcomes. Protection wanes more rapidly for infection than severe outcomes. Overall, longer dosing intervals confer higher protection against symptomatic infection, however protection decreases and becomes similar to shorter dosing interval starting 90 days after vaccination.

Myocarditis or Pericarditis Events After BNT162b2 Vaccination in Individuals Aged 12 to 17 Years in Ontario, Canada.

Importance: The risk of myocarditis or pericarditis after COVID-19 messenger RNA vaccines varies by age and sex, and there is some evidence to suggest increasing risk with shorter intervals between dose 1 and 2 (ie, interdose interval). Objective: To estimate the incidence of reported myocarditis or pericarditis after BNT162b2 vaccine among adolescents and to describe the clinical information associated with these events. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a population-based cohort study using passive vaccine safety surveillance data linked to the provincial COVID-19 vaccine registry. Included in the study were all adolescents aged 12 to 17 years in Ontario, Canada, who received 1 or more doses of BNT162b2 vaccine between December 14, 2020, and November 21, 2021, and reported an episode of myocarditis or pericarditis. Data were analyzed from December 15, 2021, to April 22, 2022. Exposure: Receipt of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty [Pfizer-BioNTech]) vaccine. Main Outcomes and Measure: Reported incidence of myocarditis or pericarditis meeting level 1 to 3 of the Brighton Collaboration case definition per 100 000 doses of BNT162b2 administered by age group (12-15 years vs 16-17 years), sex, dose number, and interdose interval. All clinical information associated with symptoms, health care usage, diagnostic test results, and treatment at the time of the acute event were summarized. Results: There were approximately 1.65 million doses of BNT162b2 administered and 77 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis among those aged 12 to 17 years, which met the inclusion criteria during the study period. Of the 77 adolescents (mean [SD] age, 15.0 [1.7] years; 63 male individuals [81.8%]), 51 (66.2%) developed myocarditis or pericarditis after dose 2 of BNT162b2. Overall, 74 individuals (96.1%) with an event were assessed in the emergency department, and 34 (44.2%) were hospitalized (median [IQR] length of stay, 1 [1-2] day). The majority of adolescents (57 [74.0%]) were treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs only, and 11 (14.3%) required no treatment. The highest reported incidence was observed among male adolescents aged 16 to 17 years after dose 2 (15.7 per 100 000; 95% CI, 9.7-23.9). Among those aged 16 to 17 years, the reporting rate was highest in those with a short (ie, ≤30 days) interdose interval (21.3 per 100 000; 95% CI, 11.0-37.2). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that there was variation in the reported incidence of myocarditis or pericarditis after BNT162b2 vaccine among adolescent age groups. However, the risk of these events after vaccination remains very rare and should be considered in relation to the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination.

Temporal trends and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine coverage and series initiation during pregnancy in Ontario, Canada, December 2020 to December 2021: A population-based retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Population-based COVID-19 vaccine coverage estimates among pregnant individuals are limited. We assessed temporal patterns in vaccine coverage (≥1 dose before or during pregnancy) and evaluated factors associated with vaccine series initiation (receiving dose 1 during pregnancy) in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We linked the provincial birth registry with COVID-19 vaccination records from December 14, 2020 to December 31, 2021 and assessed coverage rates among all pregnant individuals by month, age, and neighborhood sociodemographic characteristics. Among individuals who gave birth since April 2021-when pregnant people were prioritized for vaccination-we assessed associations between sociodemographic, behavioral, and pregnancy-related factors with vaccine series initiation using multivariable regression to estimate adjusted risk ratios (aRR) and risk differences (aRD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Among 221,190 pregnant individuals, vaccine coverage increased to 71.2% by December 2021. Gaps in coverage across categories of age and sociodemographic characteristics decreased over time, but did not disappear. Lower vaccine series initiation was associated with lower age (<25 vs. 30-34 years: aRR 0.53, 95%CI 0.51-0.56), smoking (vs. non-smoking: 0.64, 0.61-0.67), no first trimester prenatal care visit (vs. visit: 0.80, 0.77-0.84), and residing in neighborhoods with the lowest income (vs. highest: 0.69, 0.67-0.71). Vaccine series initiation was marginally higher among individuals with pre-existing medical conditions (vs. no conditions: 1.07, 1.04-1.10). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine coverage among pregnant individuals remained lower than in the general population, and there was lower vaccine initiation by multiple characteristics.

Incorporating TechQuity in Virtual Care Within the Veterans Health Administration: Identifying Future Research and Operations Priorities.

BACKGROUND: The Covid-19 pandemic dramatically changed healthcare delivery, driving rapid expansion of synchronous (i.e., real-time) audio-only and video telehealth, otherwise known as virtual care. Yet evidence describes significant inequities in virtual care utilization, with certain populations more dependent on audio-only virtual care than video-based care. Research is needed to inform virtual care policies and processes to counteract current inequities in access and health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Given the importance of incorporating equity into virtual care within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), we convened a Think Tank to identify priorities for future research and virtual care operations focused on achieving equitable implementation of virtual care within the VHA. METHODS: We used participatory activities to engage clinicians, researchers, and operational partners from across the VHA to develop priorities for equitable implementation of virtual care. We refined priorities through group discussion and force-ranked prioritization and outlined next steps for selected priorities. KEY RESULTS: Think Tank participants included 43 individuals from the VHA who represented diverse geographical regions, offices, and backgrounds. Attendees self-identified their associations primarily as operations (n = 9), research (n = 28), or both (n = 6). We identified an initial list of 63 potential priorities for future research and virtual care operations. Following discussion, we narrowed the list to four priority areas: (1) measure inequities in virtual care, (2) address emerging inequities in virtual care, (3) deploy virtual care equitably to accommodate differently abled veterans, and (4) measure and address potential adverse consequences of expanded virtual care. We discuss related information, data, key partners, and outline potential next steps. CONCLUSIONS: This Think Tank of research and operational partners from across the VHA identified promising opportunities to incorporate equity into the design and implementation of virtual care. Although much work remains, the priorities identified represent important steps toward achieving this vital goal.

"We need to protect each other": COVID-19 vaccination intentions and concerns among Racialized minority and Indigenous Peoples in Canada.

People may choose to receive vaccines in response to pressures that outweigh any concerns that they have. We explored Racialized minority and Indigenous Peoples' motivations for, perceptions of choice in, and concerns about, COVID-19 vaccination. We used a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach, including a national survey administered around the time vaccines were first authorized (Dec 2020) followed by qualitative interviews when vaccines were becoming more readily available to adults (May-June 2021). We analyzed survey data using descriptive statistics and interviews using critical feminist methodologies. Survey respondents self-identified as a Racialized minority (n = 1488) or Indigenous (n = 342), of which 71.4% and 64.6%, respectively, intended to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Quantitative results indicated perceptions of COVID-19 disease were associated with vaccination intention. For instance, intention was associated with agreement that COVID-19 disease is severe, risk of becoming sick is great, COVID-19 vaccination is necessary, and vaccines available in Canada will be safe (p < 0.001). COVID-19 vaccines were in short supply in Canada when we subsequently completed qualitative interviews with a subset of Racialized minority (n = 17) and Indigenous (n = 10) survey respondents. We coded interview transcripts around three emergent themes relating to governmentality and cultural approaches to intersectional risk theories: feelings of collective responsibility, choice as privilege, and remaining uncertainties about COVID-19 vaccines. For example, some mentioned the responsibility and privilege to receive a vaccine earlier than those living outside of Canada. Some felt constraints on their freedom to choose to receive or refuse a vaccine from intersecting oppressions or their health status. Although all participants intended to get vaccinated, many mentioned uncertainties about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination. Survey respondents and interview participants demonstrated nuanced associations of vaccine acceptance and hesitancy shaped by perspectives of vaccine-related risks, symbolic associations of vaccines with hope, and intersecting social privileges and inequities (including racialization).

Implementation mapping for tobacco cessation in a federally qualified health center.

Background: Implementation mapping (IM) is a promising five-step method for guiding planning, execution, and maintenance of an innovation. Case examples are valuable for implementation practitioners to understand considerations for applying IM. This pilot study aimed to determine the feasibility of using IM within a federally qualified health center (FQHC) with limited funds and a 1-year timeline. Methods: An urban FQHC partnered with an academic team to employ IM for implementing a computerized strategy of tobacco cessation: the 5A's (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange). Each step of IM was supplemented with theory-driven methods and frameworks. Data collection included surveys and interviews with clinic staff, analyzed via rapid data analysis. Results: Medical assistants and clinicians were identified as primary implementers of the 5A's intervention. Salient determinants of change included the perceived compatibility and relative priority of 5A's. Performance objectives and change objectives were derived to address these determinants, along with a suite of implementation strategies. Despite indicators of adoptability and acceptability of the 5A's, reductions in willingness to adopt the implementation package occurred over time and the intervention was not adopted by the FQHC within the study timeframe. This is likely due to the strain of the COVID-19 pandemic altering health clinic priorities. Conclusions: Administratively, the five IM steps are feasible to conduct with FQHC staff within 1 year. However, this study did not obtain its intended outcomes. Lessons learned include the importance of re-assessing barriers over time and ensuring a longer timeframe to observe implementation outcomes.

“We need to protect each other”: COVID-19 vaccination intentions and concerns among racialized minority and indigenous peoples in Canada

People may choose to receive vaccines in response to pressures that outweigh any concerns that they have. We explored Racialized minority and Indigenous Peoples' motivations for, perceptions of choice in, and concerns about, COVID-19 vaccination. We used a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach, including a national survey administered around the time vaccines were first authorized (Dec 2020) followed by qualitative interviews when vaccines were becoming more readily available to adults (May–June 2021). We analyzed survey data using descriptive statistics and interviews using critical feminist methodologies. Survey respondents self-identified as a Racialized minority (n = 1488) or Indigenous (n = 342), of which 71.4% and 64.6%, respectively, intended to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Quantitative results indicated perceptions of COVID-19 disease were associated with vaccination intention. For instance, intention was associated with agreement that COVID-19 disease is severe, risk of becoming sick is great, COVID-19 vaccination is necessary, and vaccines available in Canada will be safe (p < 0.001). COVID-19 vaccines were in short supply in Canada when we subsequently completed qualitative interviews with a subset of Racialized minority (n = 17) and Indigenous (n = 10) survey respondents. We coded interview transcripts around three emergent themes relating to governmentality and cultural approaches to intersectional risk theories: feelings of collective responsibility, choice as privilege, and remaining uncertainties about COVID-19 vaccines. For example, some mentioned the responsibility and privilege to receive a vaccine earlier than those living outside of Canada. Some felt constraints on their freedom to choose to receive or refuse a vaccine from intersecting oppressions or their health status. Although all participants intended to get vaccinated, many mentioned uncertainties about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination. Survey respondents and interview participants demonstrated nuanced associations of vaccine acceptance and hesitancy shaped by perspectives of vaccine-related risks, symbolic associations of vaccines with hope, and intersecting social privileges and inequities (including racialization).

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines Over Time Prior to Omicron Emergence in Ontario, Canada: Test-Negative Design Study.

Background: Waning protection from 2 doses of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines led to third dose availability in multiple countries even before the emergence of the Omicron variant. Methods: We used the test-negative study design to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against any severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, any symptomatic infection, and severe outcomes (COVID-19-related hospitalizations or death) by time since second dose of any combination of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and ChAdOx1 between January 11, and November 21, 2021, for subgroups based on patient and vaccine characteristics. Results: We included 261 360 test-positive cases (of any SARS-CoV-2 lineage) and 2 783 699 individuals as test-negative controls. VE of 2 mRNA vaccine doses decreased from 90% (95% CI, 90%-90%) 7-59 days after the second dose to 75% (95% CI, 72%-78%) after ≥240 days against infection, decreased from 94% (95% CI, 84%-95%) to 87% (95% CI, 85%-89%) against symptomatic infection, and remained stable (98% [95% CI, 97%-98%] to 98% [95% CI, 96%-99%]) against severe outcomes. Similar trends were seen with heterologous ChAdOx1 and mRNA vaccine schedules. VE estimates for dosing intervals <35 days were lower than for longer intervals (eg, VE of 2 mRNA vaccines against symptomatic infection at 120-179 days was 86% [95% CI, 85%-88%] for dosing intervals <35 days, 92% [95% CI, 91%-93%] for 35-55 days, and 91% [95% CI, 90%-92%] for ≥56 days), but when stratified by age group and subperiod, there were no differences between dosing intervals. Conclusions: Before the emergence of Omicron, VE of any 2-dose primary series, including heterologous schedules and varying dosing intervals, decreased over time against any infection and symptomatic infection but remained high against severe outcomes.

Estimated Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines Against Omicron or Delta Symptomatic Infection and Severe Outcomes.

Importance: The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, including among individuals who have received 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine, increased substantially following the emergence of the Omicron variant in Ontario, Canada. Understanding the estimated effectiveness of 2 or 3 doses of COVID-19 vaccine against outcomes associated with Omicron and Delta infections may aid decision-making at the individual and population levels. Objective: To estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic infections due to the Omicron and Delta variants and severe outcomes (hospitalization or death) associated with these infections. Design, Setting, and Participants: This test-negative case-control study used linked provincial databases for SARS-CoV-2 laboratory testing, reportable disease, COVID-19 vaccination, and health administration in Ontario, Canada. Participants were individuals aged 18 years or older who had COVID-19 symptoms or severe outcomes (hospitalization or death) and were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between December 6 and 26, 2021. Exposures: Receipt of 2 or 3 doses of the COVID-19 vaccine and time since last dose. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were symptomatic Omicron or Delta infection and severe outcomes (hospitalization or death) associated with infection. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the effectiveness of 2 or 3 COVID-19 vaccine doses by time since the latest dose compared with no vaccination. Estimated VE was calculated using the formula VE = (1 - [adjusted odds ratio]) × 100%. Results: Of 134 435 total participants, 16 087 were Omicron-positive cases (mean [SD] age, 36.0 [14.1] years; 8249 [51.3%] female), 4261 were Delta-positive cases (mean [SD] age, 44.2 [16.8] years; 2199 [51.6%] female), and 114 087 were test-negative controls (mean [SD] age, 42.0 [16.5] years; 67 884 [59.5%] female). Estimated VE against symptomatic Delta infection decreased from 89% (95% CI, 86%-92%) 7 to 59 days after a second dose to 80% (95% CI, 74%-84%) after 240 or more days but increased to 97% (95% CI, 96%-98%) 7 or more days after a third dose. Estimated VE against symptomatic Omicron infection was 36% (95% CI, 24%-45%) 7 to 59 days after a second dose and 1% (95% CI, -8% to 10%) after 180 days or longer, but 7 or more days after a third dose, it increased to 61% (95% CI, 56%-65%). Estimated VE against severe outcomes was high 7 or more days after a third dose for both Delta (99%; 95% CI, 98%-99%) and Omicron (95%; 95% CI, 87%-98%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, in contrast to high estimated VE against symptomatic Delta infection and severe outcomes after 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine, estimated VE was modest and short term against symptomatic Omicron infection but better maintained against severe outcomes. A third dose was associated with improved estimated VE against symptomatic infection and with high estimated VE against severe outcomes for both variants. Preventing infection due to Omicron and potential future variants may require tools beyond the currently available vaccines.

Risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, and stillbirth after covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy: population based retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, and stillbirth after covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy. DESIGN: Population based retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Ontario, Canada, 1 May to 31 December 2021. PARTICIPANTS: All liveborn and stillborn infants from pregnancies conceived at least 42 weeks before the end of the study period and with gestational age ≥20 weeks or birth weight ≥500 g. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Using Cox regression, hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for preterm birth before 37 weeks (overall and spontaneous preterm birth), very preterm birth (<32 weeks), small for gestational age at birth (<10th centile), and stillbirth. Vaccination against covid-19 was treated as a time varying exposure in the outcome specific risk window, and propensity score weighting was used to adjust hazard ratios for potential confounding. RESULTS: Among 85 162 births, 43 099 (50.6%) occurred in individuals who received one dose or more of a covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy-42 979 (99.7%) received an mRNA vaccine. Vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with any increased risk of overall preterm birth (6.5% among vaccinated v 6.9% among unvaccinated; adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.08), spontaneous preterm birth (3.7% v 4.4%; 0.96, 0.90 to 1.03), or very preterm birth (0.59% v 0.89%; 0.80, 0.67 to 0.95). No increase was found in risk of small for gestational age at birth (9.1% v 9.2%; 0.98, 0.93 to 1.03) or stillbirth (0.25% v 0.44%; 0.65, 0.51 to 0.84). Findings were similar by trimester of vaccination, mRNA vaccine product, and number of doses received during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that vaccination against covid-19 during pregnancy is not associated with a higher risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, or stillbirth.

Mental Health, Material Possessions, and Social Capital During COVID-19: A Study of the United States Urban Working-Age Population

This study evaluates the associations between the urban working-age population’s mental health, material possession, and social capital during the COVID-19 pandemic. The specific stressors examined in this empirical analysis are income level, food insecurity, and virtual psychological support. This paper further examines the differences across the employed and unemployed population groups. We obtained data from the COVID-19 Household Impact Survey and constructed four measures of mental health conditions: Nervous, Depressed, Lonely, and Hopeless. Our empirical analyses use an ordinal regression model that takes both time and regional factors into consideration to control for potential time effects and time-invariant confounders that only vary between regions. For the employed group, the main results suggest that lower income and food insecurity is correlated with a higher frequency of mental health symptoms, while virtual psychological support predicts a better mental health status. For the unemployed group, food insecurity is negatively associated with mental health, and virtual psychological might help alleviate nervousness and depression.

Effectiveness of a fourth dose of covid-19 mRNA vaccine against the omicron variant among long term care residents in Ontario, Canada: test negative design study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the marginal effectiveness of a fourth versus third dose and the vaccine effectiveness of mRNA covid-19 vaccines BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 against any infection, symptomatic infection, and severe outcomes (hospital admission or death) related to the omicron variant. DESIGN: Test negative design. SETTING: Long term care facilities in Ontario, Canada, 30 December 2021 to 27 April 2022. PARTICIPANTS: After exclusions, 61 344 residents aged 60 years or older across 626 long term care facilities in Ontario, Canada who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Laboratory confirmed omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection (any and symptomatic) by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), and hospital admission or death. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate marginal effectiveness (four versus three doses) and vaccine effectiveness (two, three, or four doses versus no doses) while adjusting for personal characteristics, comorbidities, week of test, and previous positive SARS-CoV-2 test result more than 90 days previously. RESULTS: 13 654 residents who tested positive for omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection and 205 862 test negative controls were included. The marginal effectiveness of a fourth dose (95% of vaccine recipients received mRNA-1273 as the fourth dose) seven days or more after vaccination versus a third dose received 84 or more days previously was 19% (95% confidence interval 12% to 26%) against infection, 31% (20% to 41%) against symptomatic infection, and 40% (24% to 52%) against severe outcomes. Vaccine effectiveness in vaccine recipients (compared with unvaccinated) increased with each additional dose, and for a fourth dose was 49% (95% confidence interval 43% to 54%) against infection, 69% (61% to 76%) against symptomatic infection, and 86% (81% to 90%) against severe outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that compared with a third dose of mRNA covid-19 vaccine, a fourth dose improved protection against infection, symptomatic infection, and severe outcomes among long term care residents during an omicron dominant period. A fourth vaccine dose was associated with strong protection against severe outcomes in vaccinated residents compared with unvaccinated residents, although the duration of protection remains unknown.