Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 35
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
2.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(10): e2130800, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1490643

ABSTRACT

Importance: Although there are reports of COVID-19 vaccine implementation in real-world populations, these come from high-income countries or from experience with messenger RNA technology vaccines. Data on outcomes of vaccine deployment in low- or middle-income countries are lacking. Objective: To assess whether the pragmatic application of the 3 COVID-19 vaccines available in Argentina, 2 of which have no reports of evaluation in real-world settings to date, were associated with a reduction in morbidity, all-cause mortality, and mortality due to COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used individual and ecological data to explore outcomes following vaccination with rAd26-rAd5, ChAdOx1, and BBIBP-CorV. To correct for differences in exposure times, results are shown using incidence density per 100 000 person-days from the start of the vaccination campaign (December 29, 2020) to the occurrence of an event or the end of follow-up (May 15, 2021). Participants included 663 602 people aged at least 60 years residing in the city of Buenos Aires, Argentina. Statistical analysis was performed from June 1 to June 15, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Diagnosis of COVID-19 confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, death from all causes, and death within 30 days of a diagnosis of COVID-19. Poisson regression models were fitted to estimate associations with all 3 outcomes. Results: Among 663 602 residents of the city of Buenos Aires included in the study, 540 792 (81.4%) were vaccinated with at least 1 dose, with 457 066 receiving 1 dose (mean [SD] age, 74.5 (8.9) years; 61.5% were female [n = 281 284]; 68.0% [n = 310 987] received the rAd26-rAd5 vaccine; 29.5% [n = 135 036] received ChAdOx1; 2.4% [n = 11 043] received BBIBP-CorV) and 83 726 receiving 2 doses (mean [SD] age, 73.4 [6.8] years; 63.5% were female [n = 53 204]). The incidence density of confirmed COVID-19 was 36.25 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 35.80-36.70 cases/100 000 person-days) among those who did not receive a vaccine, 19.13 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 18.63-19.62 cases/100 000 person-days) among those who received 1 dose, and 4.33 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 3.85-4.81 cases/100 000 person-days) among those who received 2 doses. All-cause mortality was 11.74 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 11.51-11.96 cases/100 000 person-days), 4.01 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 3.78-4.24 cases/100 000 person-days) and 0.40 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 0.26-0.55 cases/100 000 person-days). COVID-19-related-death rate was 2.31 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 2.19-2.42 cases/100 000 person-days), 0.59 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 0.50-0.67 cases/100 000 person-days), and 0.04 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 0.0-0.09 cases/100 000 person-days) among the same groups. A 2-dose vaccination schedule was associated with an 88.1% (95% CI, 86.8%-89.2%) reduction in documented infection, 96.6% (95% CI, 95.3%-97.5%) reduction in all-cause death, and 98.3% (95% CI, 95.3%-99.4%) reduction in COVID-19-related death. A single dose was associated with a 47.2% (95% CI, 44.2%-50.1%) reduction in documented infection, 65.8% (95% CI, 61.7%-69.5%) reduction in all-cause death, and 74.5% (95% CI, 66%-80.8%) reduction in COVID-19-related death. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that within the first 5 months after the start of the vaccination campaign, vaccination was associated with a significant reduction in COVID-19 infection as well as a reduction in mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization Programs , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Argentina/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , COVID-19 Vaccines/classification , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cohort Studies , Ecological Parameter Monitoring/methods , Ecological Parameter Monitoring/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Immunization Programs/organization & administration , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Vaccine Potency
4.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(9): e30010, 2021 09 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1417039

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared SARS-CoV-2, causing COVID-19, as a pandemic. The UK mass vaccination program commenced on December 8, 2020, vaccinating groups of the population deemed to be most vulnerable to severe COVID-19 infection. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the early vaccine administration coverage and outcome data across an integrated care system in North West London, leveraging a unique population-level care data set. Vaccine effectiveness of a single dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines were compared. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study identified 2,183,939 individuals eligible for COVID-19 vaccination between December 8, 2020, and February 24, 2021, within a primary, secondary, and community care integrated care data set. These data were used to assess vaccination hesitancy across ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic deprivation measures (Pearson product-moment correlations); investigate COVID-19 transmission related to vaccination hubs; and assess the early effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination (after a single dose) using time-to-event analyses with multivariable Cox regression analysis to investigate if vaccination independently predicted positive SARS-CoV-2 in those vaccinated compared to those unvaccinated. RESULTS: In this study, 5.88% (24,332/413,919) of individuals declined and did not receive a vaccination. Black or Black British individuals had the highest rate of declining a vaccine at 16.14% (4337/26,870). There was a strong negative association between socioeconomic deprivation and rate of declining vaccination (r=-0.94; P=.002) with 13.5% (1980/14,571) of individuals declining vaccination in the most deprived areas compared to 0.98% (869/9609) in the least. In the first 6 days after vaccination, 344 of 389,587 (0.09%) individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The rate increased to 0.13% (525/389,243) between days 7 and 13, before then gradually falling week on week. At 28 days post vaccination, there was a 74% (hazard ratio 0.26, 95% CI 0.19-0.35) and 78% (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.18-0.27) reduction in risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 for individuals that received the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines, respectively, when compared with unvaccinated individuals. A very low proportion of hospital admissions were seen in vaccinated individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (288/389,587, 0.07% of all patients vaccinated) providing evidence for vaccination effectiveness after a single dose. CONCLUSIONS: There was no definitive evidence to suggest COVID-19 was transmitted as a result of vaccination hubs during the vaccine administration rollout in North West London, and the risk of contracting COVID-19 or becoming hospitalized after vaccination has been demonstrated to be low in the vaccinated population. This study provides further evidence that a single dose of either the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine or the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is effective at reducing the risk of testing positive for COVID-19 up to 60 days across all age groups, ethnic groups, and risk categories in an urban UK population.


Subject(s)
Anti-Vaccination Movement/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Vaccines/standards , Immunization Programs/standards , Anti-Vaccination Movement/psychology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cohort Studies , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , London , Retrospective Studies
5.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 18117, 2021 09 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1406408

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 vaccination is being rapidly rolled out in the US and many other countries, and it is crucial to provide fast and accurate assessment of vaccination coverage and vaccination gaps to make strategic adjustments promoting vaccine coverage. We reported the effective use of real-time geospatial analysis to identify barriers and gaps in COVID-19 vaccination in a minority population living in South Texas on the US-Mexico Border, to inform vaccination campaign strategies. We developed 4 rank-based approaches to evaluate the vaccination gap at the census tract level, which considered both population vulnerability and vaccination priority and eligibility. We identified areas with the highest vaccination gaps using different assessment approaches. Real-time geospatial analysis to identify vaccination gaps is critical to rapidly increase vaccination uptake, and to reach herd immunity in the vulnerable and the vaccine hesitant groups. Our results assisted the City of Brownsville Public Health Department in adjusting real-time targeting of vaccination, gathering coverage assessment, and deploying services to areas identified as high vaccination gap. The analyses and responses can be adopted in other locations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Geography , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Mexico/ethnology , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Minority Health/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Socioeconomic Factors , Texas/ethnology , Vaccination/methods , Vaccination Coverage/methods , Vulnerable Populations/ethnology , Vulnerable Populations/statistics & numerical data
7.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 40(3): 100874, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384804

ABSTRACT

We report data regarding three countries with similar healthcare systems which had three different vaccinal strategies between 1st of January and 10th of April 2021: rapid full vaccination (Israel), rapid first-dose vaccination (United Kingdom) and a delayed vaccination strategy (France).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Brazil , COVID-19/virology , France , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Immunization Schedule , Israel , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , South Africa , United Kingdom
8.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0256394, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1367706

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 vaccination campaign in the US has been immensely successful in vaccinating those who are receptive, further increases in vaccination rates however will require more innovative approaches to reach those who remain hesitant. Developing vaccination strategies that are modelled on what people want could further increase uptake. METHODS AND FINDINGS: To inform COVID-19 vaccine distribution strategies that are aligned with public preferences we conducted a discrete choice experiment among the US public (N = 2,895) between March 15 to March 22, 2021. We applied sampling weights, evaluated mean preferences using mixed logit models, and identified latent class preference subgroups. On average, the public prioritized ease, preferring single to two dose vaccinations (mean preference: -0.29; 95%CI: -0.37 to -0.20), vaccinating once rather than annually (mean preference: -0.79; 95%CI: -0.89 to -0.70) and reducing waiting times at vaccination sites. Vaccine enforcement reduced overall vaccine acceptance (mean preference -0.20; 95%CI: -0.30 to -0.10), with a trend of increasing resistance to enforcement with increasing vaccine hesitancy. Latent class analysis identified four distinct preference phenotypes: the first prioritized inherent "vaccine features" (46.1%), the second were concerned about vaccine "service delivery" (8.8%), a third group desired "social proof" of vaccine safety and were susceptible to enforcement (13.2%), and the fourth group were "indifferent" to vaccine and service delivery features and resisted enforcement (31.9%). CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies several critical insights for the COVID-19 public health response. First, identifying preference segments is essential to ensure that vaccination services meet the needs of diverse population subgroups. Second, making vaccination easy and promoting autonomy by simplifying services and offering the public choices (where feasible) may increase uptake in those who remain deliberative. And, third vaccine mandates have the potential to increase vaccination rates in susceptible groups but may simultaneously promote control aversion and resistance in those who are most hesitant.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Immunization Programs/organization & administration , Adult , African Americans , Consumer Behavior , Female , Humans , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Politics , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States , Vaccination Coverage , Vaccination Refusal
10.
Value Health ; 24(11): 1543-1550, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1340748

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Amid a pandemic, vaccines represent a promising solution for mitigating public health and economic crises, and an improved understanding of individuals' vaccination intentions is crucial to design optimal immunization campaigns. This study predicts uptake rates for different COVID-19 vaccine specifications and identifies personal characteristics that moderate an individual's responsiveness to vaccine attributes. METHODS: We developed an online survey with contingent specifications of a COVID-19 vaccine, varying in effectiveness, risks of side effects, duration of immunity, and out-of-pocket cost. Using population-averaged logit models, we estimated vaccine uptake rates that account for uncertainty, heterogeneity across respondents, and interactions between vaccine and personal characteristics. RESULTS: We obtained 3047 completed surveys. The highest uptake rate for an annual vaccine, 62%, is predicted when vaccine effectiveness is 80% to 90%, side effects are minimal, and the vaccine is provided at zero cost, with decreases seen in the uptake rate for less effective vaccines, for example, 50% for 50% to 60% effectiveness. Moreover, we found that Americans' response to vaccine effectiveness depends on their self-reported concern, that is, concerned respondents report a higher willingness to get vaccinated. Our findings also indicate that COVID-19 vaccine uptake rates decrease with vaccine cost and that responsiveness to vaccine cost is moderated by income. CONCLUSIONS: Although providing the COVID-19 vaccine at zero cost will motivate many individuals to get vaccinated, a policy focused exclusively on vaccine cost may not be enough to reach herd immunity thresholds. Although those concerned with COVID-19 will participate, further evidence is needed on how to incentivize participation among the unconcerned (43%) to prevent further pandemic spread.


Subject(s)
Anti-Vaccination Movement/psychology , Immunization Programs/standards , Anti-Vaccination Movement/trends , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Intention , Motivation , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States
12.
Epidemiol Infect ; 149: e187, 2021 08 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1338508

ABSTRACT

We update our previous insights into COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in Finland. Vaccine acceptance increased from 64% (November/December 2020) to 74% (April 2021). However, there was a group of participants that were preferring to wait to get vaccinated ranging from 6% of over-64-years-olds to 29% of under-30-years-olds. The previously identified enablers convenience (below-50-years-olds), worry about severe disease and protection for oneself (above-50-years-olds) were no longer significantly associated with increased vaccine acceptance. Understanding barriers and enablers behind vaccine acceptance is decisive in ensuring a successful implementation of COVID-19 vaccination programs, which will be key to ending the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/psychology , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Female , Finland , Humans , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Young Adult
13.
Expert Rev Vaccines ; 20(9): 1177-1183, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1338598

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It remains hesitant to include a two-dose varicella vaccine (VarV) in a national routine immunization program in China. We aimed to quantify the impact of the two-dose VarV on varicella incidence in Shanghai. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We directly extracted the data of varicella cases and VarV doses in 2013-2020 in Shanghai, and then estimated the effects of two-dose VarV using a Serfling model. RESULTS: A two-dose VarV immunization program has been extensively implemented since October 2017 and become free since August 2018 in Shanghai. Before and after this program, varicella cases significantly declined in children (P < 0.01), whereas did not in adults aged >18 years (P = 0.22). Compared to the predicted number of varicella cases, actual number was significantly lower by 8% in 2018 and 28% in 2019. Among children aged 4-6 years, the reduction in varicella cases was largest. Moreover, there was a significant reduction in varicella cases throughout 2020 (P < 0.001), in which the decrease due to social distancing for the COVID-19 was 54%. CONCLUSIONS: A two-dose VarV immunization program may further reduce approximately one-third of varicella cases in Shanghai. Children <4 years and adults benefit less in this program, which warrants enhancing the immunization.


Subject(s)
Chickenpox Vaccine/immunology , Chickenpox/epidemiology , Chickenpox/prevention & control , Mass Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/prevention & control , Chickenpox Vaccine/administration & dosage , Child , Child, Preschool , China/epidemiology , Humans , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Physical Distancing
15.
Am J Med ; 134(11): 1424-1426, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1330598

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A decrease in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination rates has led some states to consider various incentives to boost demand for vaccines. On May 13, 2021, Ohio announced a free weekly lottery for individuals who received at least 1 COVID-19 vaccination. This study seeks to rigorously quantify the impact of Ohio's vaccination lottery. METHODS: A synthetic control consisting of a weighted combination of other states was used to approximate the demographic characteristics, new cases, and vaccination rates in Ohio prior to the lottery announcement. The difference in vaccination rates in Ohio and the synthetic control following the lottery announcement was then used to estimate the lottery's impact. RESULTS: Prior to the lottery announcement, Ohio and synthetic Ohio had similar demographic characteristics and new case rates. Ohio and synthetic Ohio also had identical first vaccination rates. By the final lottery enrollment date of June 20, the percentage of the population with first vaccinations increased to 47.41% in Ohio and 46.43% in synthetic Ohio for a difference of 0.98% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-1.54). CONCLUSION: An additional 114,553 Ohioans received vaccinations as a result of the Vax-a-Million program (95% CI 49,094-180,012) at a cost of approximately $49 per Ohioan vaccinated (95% CI $31-$114). However, a majority of Ohioans remained unvaccinated by the end of the lottery, indicating that additional efforts are needed to address barriers to vaccination. This synthetic control approach may also be useful to evaluate other COVID-19 incentive programs.


Subject(s)
Behavior Control/methods , COVID-19 , Immunization Programs , Mass Vaccination , Motivation , Vaccination Coverage , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Immunization Programs/organization & administration , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Male , Mass Vaccination/psychology , Mass Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Ohio/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination Coverage/methods , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Refusal/psychology
16.
Healthc Q ; 24(2): 7-11, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1323459

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for a robust and nimble public health data infrastructure. ICES - a government-sponsored, independent, non-profit research institute in Ontario, Canada - functions as a key component of a resilient information infrastructure and an enabler of data co-production, contributing to Ontario's response to the COVID-19 pandemic as part of a learning health system. Linked data on the cumulative incidence of infection and vaccination at the neighbourhood level revealed disparate uptake between areas with low versus high risk of COVID-19. These data were leveraged by the government, service providers, media and the public to inform a more efficient and equitable vaccination strategy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , Learning Health System/organization & administration , Public Health Administration , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/supply & distribution , Health Equity/organization & administration , Humans , Immunization Programs/organization & administration , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Learning Health System/methods , Middle Aged , Ontario/epidemiology , Vaccination Coverage/organization & administration , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
17.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy ; 19(4): 463-472, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1300549

ABSTRACT

With vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) being introduced in countries across the world, policy makers are facing many practical considerations about how best to implement a vaccination programme. The supply of vaccines is insufficient for the global population, so decisions must be made as to which groups are prioritised for any vaccination and when. Furthermore, the aims of vaccination programmes will differ between countries, with some prioritising economic benefits that could stem from the relaxation of non-pharmaceutical interventions and others seeking simply to reduce the number of COVID-19 cases or deaths. This paper aims to share the experiences and lessons learned from conducting economic evaluations in Singapore and Thailand on hypothetical COVID-19 vaccines to provide a basis for other countries to develop their own contextualised economic evaluations, with particular focus on the key uncertainties, technical challenges, and characteristics that modellers should consider in partnership with key stakeholders. Which vaccines, vaccination strategies, and policy responses are most economically beneficial remains uncertain. It is therefore important for all governments to conduct their own analyses to inform local policy responses to COVID-19, including the implementation of COVID-19 vaccines in both the short and the long run. It is essential that such studies are designed, and ideally conducted, before vaccines are introduced so that policy decisions and implementation procedures are not delayed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/economics , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Policy/economics , Immunization Programs/economics , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/economics , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Singapore , Thailand
19.
Elife ; 102021 06 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1285537

ABSTRACT

Background: Childhood immunisation services have been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. WHO recommends considering outbreak risk using epidemiological criteria when deciding whether to conduct preventive vaccination campaigns during the pandemic. Methods: We used two to three models per infection to estimate the health impact of 50% reduced routine vaccination coverage in 2020 and delay of campaign vaccination from 2020 to 2021 for measles vaccination in Bangladesh, Chad, Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria, and South Sudan, for meningococcal A vaccination in Burkina Faso, Chad, Niger, and Nigeria, and for yellow fever vaccination in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, and Nigeria. Our counterfactual comparative scenario was sustaining immunisation services at coverage projections made prior to COVID-19 (i.e. without any disruption). Results: Reduced routine vaccination coverage in 2020 without catch-up vaccination may lead to an increase in measles and yellow fever disease burden in the modelled countries. Delaying planned campaigns in Ethiopia and Nigeria by a year may significantly increase the risk of measles outbreaks (both countries did complete their supplementary immunisation activities (SIAs) planned for 2020). For yellow fever vaccination, delay in campaigns leads to a potential disease burden rise of >1 death per 100,000 people per year until the campaigns are implemented. For meningococcal A vaccination, short-term disruptions in 2020 are unlikely to have a significant impact due to the persistence of direct and indirect benefits from past introductory campaigns of the 1- to 29-year-old population, bolstered by inclusion of the vaccine into the routine immunisation schedule accompanied by further catch-up campaigns. Conclusions: The impact of COVID-19-related disruption to vaccination programs varies between infections and countries. Planning and implementation of campaigns should consider country and infection-specific epidemiological factors and local immunity gaps worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic when prioritising vaccines and strategies for catch-up vaccination. Funding: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Measles/prevention & control , Meningococcal Infections/prevention & control , Yellow Fever/prevention & control , Adolescent , Adult , Africa/epidemiology , Bangladesh/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Infant , Measles/epidemiology , Measles Vaccine/therapeutic use , Meningococcal Infections/epidemiology , Meningococcal Vaccines/therapeutic use , Pandemics , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Yellow Fever/epidemiology , Yellow Fever Vaccine/therapeutic use , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...