Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Int J Equity Health ; 21(1): 82, 2022 06 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35701823

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Evidence to date has shown that inequality in health, and vaccination coverage in particular, can have ramifications to wider society. However, whilst individual studies have sought to characterise these heterogeneities in immunisation coverage at national level, few have taken a broad and quantitative view of the contributing factors to heterogeneity in immunisation coverage and impact, i.e. the number of cases, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years averted. This systematic review aims to highlight these geographic, demographic, and sociodemographic characteristics through a qualitative and quantitative approach, vital to prioritise and optimise vaccination policies. METHODS: A systematic review of two databases (PubMed and Web of Science) was undertaken using search terms and keywords to identify studies examining factors on immunisation inequality and heterogeneity in vaccination coverage. Inclusion criteria were applied independently by two researchers. Studies including data on key characteristics of interest were further analysed through a meta-analysis to produce a pooled estimate of the risk ratio using a random effects model for that characteristic. RESULTS: One hundred and eight studies were included in this review. We found that inequalities in wealth, education, and geographic access can affect vaccine impact and vaccination dropout. We estimated those living in rural areas were not significantly different in terms of full vaccination status compared to urban areas but noted considerable heterogeneity between countries. We found that females were 3% (95%CI[1%, 5%]) less likely to be fully vaccinated than males. Additionally, we estimated that children whose mothers had no formal education were 28% (95%CI[18%,47%]) less likely to be fully vaccinated than those whose mother had primary level, or above, education. Finally, we found that individuals in the poorest wealth quintile were 27% (95%CI [16%,37%]) less likely to be fully vaccinated than those in the richest. CONCLUSIONS: We found a nuanced picture of inequality in vaccination coverage and access with wealth disparity dominating, and likely driving, other disparities. This review highlights the complex landscape of inequity and further need to design vaccination strategies targeting missed subgroups to improve and recover vaccination coverage following the COVID-19 pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero, CRD42021261927.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas , Criança , Países em Desenvolvimento , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , Vacinação , Cobertura Vacinal
2.
Elife ; 102021 07 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34253291

RESUMO

Background: Vaccination is one of the most effective public health interventions. We investigate the impact of vaccination activities for Haemophilus influenzae type b, hepatitis B, human papillomavirus, Japanese encephalitis, measles, Neisseria meningitidis serogroup A, rotavirus, rubella, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and yellow fever over the years 2000-2030 across 112 countries. Methods: Twenty-one mathematical models estimated disease burden using standardised demographic and immunisation data. Impact was attributed to the year of vaccination through vaccine-activity-stratified impact ratios. Results: We estimate 97 (95%CrI[80, 120]) million deaths would be averted due to vaccination activities over 2000-2030, with 50 (95%CrI[41, 62]) million deaths averted by activities between 2000 and 2019. For children under-5 born between 2000 and 2030, we estimate 52 (95%CrI[41, 69]) million more deaths would occur over their lifetimes without vaccination against these diseases. Conclusions: This study represents the largest assessment of vaccine impact before COVID-19-related disruptions and provides motivation for sustaining and improving global vaccination coverage in the future. Funding: VIMC is jointly funded by Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) (BMGF grant number: OPP1157270 / INV-009125). Funding from Gavi is channelled via VIMC to the Consortium's modelling groups (VIMC-funded institutions represented in this paper: Imperial College London, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Public Health England, Johns Hopkins University, The Pennsylvania State University, Center for Disease Analysis Foundation, Kaiser Permanente Washington, University of Cambridge, University of Notre Dame, Harvard University, Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers, Emory University, National University of Singapore). Funding from BMGF was used for salaries of the Consortium secretariat (authors represented here: TBH, MJ, XL, SE-L, JT, KW, NMF, KAMG); and channelled via VIMC for travel and subsistence costs of all Consortium members (all authors). We also acknowledge funding from the UK Medical Research Council and Department for International Development, which supported aspects of VIMC's work (MRC grant number: MR/R015600/1).JHH acknowledges funding from National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship; Richard and Peggy Notebaert Premier Fellowship from the University of Notre Dame. BAL acknowledges funding from NIH/NIGMS (grant number R01 GM124280) and NIH/NIAID (grant number R01 AI112970). The Lives Saved Tool (LiST) receives funding support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.This paper was compiled by all coauthors, including two coauthors from Gavi. Other funders had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. All authors had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.


Assuntos
Infecções Bacterianas/prevenção & controle , Vacinas Bacterianas/uso terapêutico , COVID-19 , Saúde Global , Modelos Biológicos , SARS-CoV-2 , Infecções Bacterianas/epidemiologia , Humanos
3.
Elife ; 102021 06 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34165077

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
COVID-19/epidemiologia , Programas de Imunização/estatística & dados numéricos , Sarampo/prevenção & controle , Infecções Meningocócicas/prevenção & controle , Febre Amarela/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Adulto , África/epidemiologia , Bangladesh/epidemiologia , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Surtos de Doenças , Humanos , Programas de Imunização/métodos , Lactente , Sarampo/epidemiologia , Vacina contra Sarampo/uso terapêutico , Infecções Meningocócicas/epidemiologia , Vacinas Meningocócicas/uso terapêutico , Pandemias , Medição de Risco , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Febre Amarela/epidemiologia , Vacina contra Febre Amarela/uso terapêutico , Adulto Jovem
4.
Elife ; 102021 03 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33722340

RESUMO

Yellow fever (YF) is a viral, vector-borne, haemorrhagic fever endemic in tropical regions of Africa and South America. The vaccine for YF is considered safe and effective, but intervention strategies need to be optimised; one of the tools for this is mathematical modelling. We refine and expand an existing modelling framework for Africa to account for transmission in South America. We fit to YF occurrence and serology data. We then estimate the subnational forces of infection for the entire endemic region. Finally, using demographic and vaccination data, we examine the impact of vaccination activities. We estimate that there were 109,000 (95% credible interval [CrI] [67,000-173,000]) severe infections and 51,000 (95% CrI [31,000-82,000]) deaths due to YF in Africa and South America in 2018. We find that mass vaccination activities in Africa reduced deaths by 47% (95% CrI [10%-77%]). This methodology allows us to evaluate the effectiveness of vaccination and illustrates the need for continued vigilance and surveillance of YF.


Assuntos
Carga Global da Doença , Febre Amarela/epidemiologia , África/epidemiologia , Surtos de Doenças , Saúde Global , Humanos , Vacinação em Massa/estatística & dados numéricos , Modelos Teóricos , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos , América do Sul/epidemiologia , Inquéritos e Questionários , Vacinação/métodos , Febre Amarela/prevenção & controle , Febre Amarela/transmissão , Vacina contra Febre Amarela/uso terapêutico
5.
Elife ; 92020 07 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32718436

RESUMO

Yellow Fever (YF) is an arbovirus endemic in tropical regions of South America and Africa and it is estimated to cause 78,000 deaths a year in Africa alone. Climate change may have substantial effects on the transmission of YF and we present the first analysis of the potential impact on disease burden. We extend an existing model of YF transmission to account for rainfall and a temperature suitability index and project transmission intensity across the African endemic region in the context of four climate change scenarios. We use these transmission projections to assess the change in burden in 2050 and 2070. We find disease burden changes heterogeneously across the region. In the least severe scenario, we find a 93.0%[95%CI(92.7, 93.2%)] chance that annual deaths will increase in 2050. This change in epidemiology will complicate future control efforts. Thus, we may need to consider the effect of changing climatic variables on future intervention strategies.


Assuntos
Aedes/fisiologia , Mudança Climática , Surtos de Doenças/estatística & dados numéricos , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa/estatística & dados numéricos , Mosquitos Vetores/fisiologia , Febre Amarela/epidemiologia , Febre Amarela/transmissão , África/epidemiologia , Animais , Carga Global da Doença , Humanos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...