Identification of Key Factors for Optimized Health Care Services: Protocol for a Multiphase Study of the Dubai Vaccination Campaign.

BACKGROUND: Mass vaccination of the global population against the novel COVID-19 outbreak posed multiple challenges, including effectively administering millions of doses in a short period of time while ensuring public safety and accessibility. The government of Dubai launched a mass campaign in December 2020 to vaccinate all its citizens and residents, targeting the population aged >18 years against COVID-19. The vaccination campaign involved a transformation of multiple commercial spaces into mass vaccination centers across the city of Dubai, the largest of which was the Dubai One Central (DOC) vaccination center. It was operational between January 17, 2021, and 27 January 27, 2022. OBJECTIVE: The multiphase research study aims to empirically explore the opinions of multiple health care stakeholders, elicit the key success factors that can influence the effective delivery of emergency health care services such as a COVID-19 mass vaccination center, and explore how these factors relate to one another. METHODS: To understand more about the operations of the DOC vaccination center, the study follows a multiphase design divided into 2 phases. The study is being conducted by the Institute for Excellence in Health Professions Education at Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences between December 2021 and January 2023. To elicit the key success factors that contributed to the vaccination campaign administered at DOC, the research team conducted 30 semistructured interviews (SSIs) with a sample of staff and volunteers who worked at the DOC vaccination center. Stratified random sampling was used to select the participants, and the interview cohort included representatives from the management team, team leaders, the administration and registration team, vaccinators, and volunteers. A total of 103 people were invited to take part in the research study, and 30 agreed to participate in the SSIs. To validate the participation of various stakeholders, phase 2 will analytically investigate one's subjectivity through Q-methodology and empirically investigate the opinions obtained from the research participants during phase 1. RESULTS: As of July 2022, 30 SSIs were conducted with the research participants. CONCLUSIONS: The study will provide a comprehensive 2-phase approach to obtaining the key success factors that can influence the delivery of high-quality health care services such as emergency services launched during a global pandemic. The study's findings will be translated into key factors that could support designing future health care services utilizing evidence-based practice. In line with future plans, a study will use data, collected through the DOC vaccination center, to develop a simulation model outlining the process of the customer journey and center workflow. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/42278.

Using Location Intelligence to Evaluate the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign in the United States: Spatiotemporal Big Data Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Highly effective COVID-19 vaccines are available and free of charge in the United States. With adequate coverage, their use may help return life back to normal and reduce COVID-19-related hospitalization and death. Many barriers to widespread inoculation have prevented herd immunity, including vaccine hesitancy, lack of vaccine knowledge, and misinformation. The Ad Council and COVID Collaborative have been conducting one of the largest nationwide targeted campaigns ("It's Up to You") to communicate vaccine information and encourage timely vaccination across the United States. More than 300 major brands, digital and print media companies, and community-based organizations support the campaigns to reach distinct audiences. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to use aggregated mobility data to assess the effectiveness of the campaign on COVID-19 vaccine uptake. METHODS: Campaign exposure data were collected from the Cuebiq advertising impact measurement platform consisting of about 17 million opted-in and deidentified mobile devices across the country. A Bayesian spatiotemporal hierarchical model was developed to assess campaign effectiveness through estimating the association between county-level campaign exposure and vaccination rates reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. To minimize potential bias in exposure to the campaign, the model included several control variables (eg, age, race or ethnicity, income, and political affiliation). We also incorporated conditional autoregressive residual models to account for apparent spatiotemporal autocorrelation. RESULTS: The data set covers a panel of 3104 counties from 48 states and the District of Columbia during a period of 22 weeks (March 29 to August 29, 2021). Officially launched in February 2021, the campaign reached about 3% of the anonymous devices on the Cuebiq platform by the end of March, which was the start of the study period. That exposure rate gradually declined to slightly above 1% in August 2021, effectively ending the study period. Results from the Bayesian hierarchical model indicate a statistically significant positive association between campaign exposure and vaccine uptake at the county level. A campaign that reaches everyone would boost the vaccination rate by 2.2% (95% uncertainty interval: 2.0%-2.4%) on a weekly basis, compared to the baseline case of no campaign. CONCLUSIONS: The "It's Up to You" campaign is effective in promoting COVID-19 vaccine uptake, suggesting that a nationwide targeted mass media campaign with multisectoral collaborations could be an impactful health communication strategy to improve progress against this and future pandemics. Methodologically, the results also show that location intelligence and mobile phone-based monitoring platforms can be effective in measuring impact of large-scale digital campaigns in near real time.

When the market got the first dose: Stock volatility and vaccination campaign in COVID-19 period.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the news of clinical trials for vaccines and mass vaccinations have brought renewed optimism for stabilizing the economy and financial markets. However, the mental stress of investors or doubt about the effectiveness of government policies to cope with economic disruptions has caused stock market volatility. We investigate the significance of the vaccination rate in alleviating the global stock market volatility which is measured by the GJR-GARCH model. We discover that a higher vaccine initiation rate has a positive effect on global stock markets, especially in developed countries and areas with higher rates than their average. Our findings remain reliable even when using different projected volatility models and other estimates of the main independent variables. Mass immunization also implies that governments will not have to take extreme measures to handle the pandemic, which alleviates investor worries about compliance and the prolonged effects of COVID-19. Our research indicates that global stock markets are providing insight into the economic value of the development of COVID-19 vaccines, even before public vaccinations start.

COVID Vaccine Information Sources Utilized by Female Healthcare Workers.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of the messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccines excluded individuals with active reproductive needs (attempting to conceive, currently pregnant, and/or lactating). Women comprise three-quarters of healthcare workers in the United States-an occupational field among the first to receive the vaccine. Professional medical and government organizations have encouraged shared decision-making and access to vaccination among those with active reproductive needs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize the information sources used by pregnancy-capable healthcare workers for information about the COVID-19 vaccines and to compare the self-reported "most important" source by the respondents' active reproductive needs, if any. STUDY DESIGN: This was a web-based national survey of female, US-based healthcare workers in January 2021. Recruitment was done using social media and subsequent sharing via word of mouth. We classified the respondents into 6 groups on the basis of self-reported reproductive needs as follows: (1) preventing pregnancy, (2) attempting pregnancy, (3) currently pregnant, (4) lactating, (5) attempting pregnancy and lactating, and (6) currently pregnant and lactating. We provided respondents with a list of information sources (friends, family, obstetrician-gynecologists, pediatrician, news, social media, government organizations, their employer, and "other") and asked respondents which source(s) they used when looking for information about the vaccine and their most important source. We used descriptive statistics to characterize the information sources and compared the endorsement of government organizations and obstetrician-gynecologists, which were the most important information source between reproductive groups, using the chi-square test. The effect size was calculated using Cramér V. RESULTS: Our survey had 11,405 unique respondents: 5846 (51.3%) were preventing pregnancy, 955 (8.4%) were attempting pregnancy, 2196 (19.3%) were currently pregnant, 2250 (19.7%) were lactating, 67 (0.6%) were attempting pregnancy and lactating, and 91 (0.8%) were currently pregnant and lactating. The most endorsed information sources were government organizations (88.7%), employers (48.5%), obstetrician-gynecologists (44.9%), and social media (39.6%). Considering the most important information source, the distribution of respondents endorsing government organizations was different between reproductive groups (P<.001); it was most common among respondents preventing pregnancy (62.6%) and least common among those currently pregnant (31.5%). We observed an inverse pattern among the respondents endorsing an obstetrician-gynecologist as the most important source; the source was most common among currently pregnant respondents (51.4%) and least common among those preventing pregnancy (5.8%), P<.001. The differences in the endorsement of social media as an information source between groups were significant but had a small effect size. CONCLUSION: Healthcare workers use government and professional medical organizations for information. Respondents attempting pregnancy and those pregnant and/or lactating are more likely to use social media and an obstetrician-gynecologist as information sources for vaccine decision-making. These data can inform public health messaging and counseling for clinicians.

Between beliefs, doubts, risks, and causes. The interpretive style of epidemiology and conspiracy

This paper focuses on the interpretive styles of epidemiology and conspiracy-pseudoscientific theories from a semiotic point of view, referring to the case of the interruption of the AstraZeneca vaccine campaign in Italy - March 2021. In order to understand the structural specificities of these styles, my approach consists in analysing the kind of epistemic and intersubjective criteria and practices through which the unknown risk factor is interpreted and the relative hypothesis is evaluated. I will refer to these features as the concrete realizations of the collective ethos of these forms of life, meaning a shared set of values that determine these practices and criteria and is shaped by them at the same time. Following this path, the mediating instance between the interpretive style of an epidemiologic or conspiracy hypothesis and the respective shared ethos is found in the enunciative praxis of these forms of life. The enunciative praxis determines the movements and criteria for the production and evaluation of every hypothesis. Thus, following this proposal, I will analyse epidemiology and conspiracy's interpretive styles, enunciative praxis and forms of life, referring to the AstraZeneca case.

Eight Good Reasons for Careful Monitoring and Evaluation of the Vaccine Campaign against COVID-19: Lessons Learned through the Lombardy Experience for Dealing with Next Challenges.

BACKGROUND: Using the knowledge gained during the first eleven months of the vaccine campaign in Lombardy, Italy, we provide an overview of the benefits of using reliable, complete, and rapidly available observational data to monitor the progress of the vaccine strategy. METHODS: A population-based platform was implemented by linking four registries reporting individual data on: (i) date, type, and dose of vaccine dispensed; (ii) SARS-CoV-2 infections and hospital admissions and deaths due to COVID-19; (iii) inpatient diagnoses and outpatient services supplied by the Regional Health Services (RHS); and the (iv) health registry reporting and updating data on patient status. Background, methods, findings, and implications of eight COVID-19 relevant questions are reported. RESULTS: Before starting the vaccine campaign, we identified high-risk individuals who need to be prioritized. During the vaccine campaign, we: (i) monitored the trend in the speed of the vaccine campaign progression and the number of prevented clinical outcomes; (ii) verified that available vaccines work in real-life, assessed their effectiveness-harm profile, and measured their reduced effectiveness against the delta variant. Finally, we studied the reduced effectiveness of the vaccine over time and identified risk factors of post-vaccine infection and severe illness. CONCLUSIONS: The correct use of rapidly available observational data of good quality and completeness generates reliable evidence to promptly inform patients and policymakers.

Vaccine uptake and constrained decision making: The case of Covid-19.

Policy makers require support in conceptualizing and assessing the impact that vaccination policies can have on the proportion of the population being vaccinated against COVID-19. To this purpose, we propose a behavioural economics-based framework to model vaccination choices. We calibrate our model using up-to-date surveys on people attitudes toward vaccination as well as estimates of COVID-19 infection and mortality rates and vaccine efficacy for the UK population. Our findings show that vaccine campaigns hardly reach herd immunity if the sceptics have real-time information on the proportion of the population being vaccinated and the negationists do not change their attitudes toward vaccination. Based on our results, we discuss the main implications of the model's application in the context of nudging and voluntariness versus mandatory rule-based policies.

Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine: need of a reasoned and effective vaccine campaign.

OBJECTIVES: A strong COVID-19 vaccine campaign is needed to reach the herd immunity and reduce this pandemic infection. STUDY DESIGN: In the Foch Hospital, France, in February 2021, 451 healthcare workers were vaccinated by a first dose of AstraZeneca vaccine. METHODS: Adverse effects were reported to our pharmaco-vigilance circuit, by an online and anonymous questionnaire following the first weeks of the vaccinal campaign to healthcare workers. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-four (60.8%) of them reported multiple adverse effects. Main adverse effects reported were feverish state/chills (65.7%), fatigue/physical discomfort (62.4%), arthralgia/muscle pain (61.0%) and fever (44.5%). CONCLUSIONS: On March 2021 many European countries suspended AstraZeneca vaccine for one week due to safety uncertainty. Thus, confidence in its efficacy is undermined. However, the benefit/risk balance is clearly in favor of vaccination.