-
Child: Care, Health and Development Sep 2023The objective was to carry out a systematic review on the acceptance of parents to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 and the factors that contribute for... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The objective was to carry out a systematic review on the acceptance of parents to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 and the factors that contribute for vaccination hesitancy.
METHODS
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Re- views and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the Patient, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome (PICO) strategy were followed. A search was carried out in the VHL Regional Portal, PubMed, Scielo, Web of Science, Embase and Scopus databases. We included articles that assessed the rate of acceptance and/or hesitation of parents and the factors that affect the decision about vaccination against COVID-19 for their children in cross-sectional studies. Laboratory studies, animal models, tests and case reports that elected other aspects related to COVID-19 were excluded. The methodological quality of the studies was based on the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data, developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute.
RESULTS
From the 708 articles found, 237 studies remained after removal of duplicates. Titles and abstracts of these publications were evaluated and, applying the exclusion criteria, 56 articles were selected. Inclusion criteria were employed and 28 studies were eligible. Overall average vaccination acceptance rate was 55.81%, and the main reasons for vaccine hesitancy were uncertainty of vaccine efficacy and safety, concerns about side effects, and lack of access to relevant information.
CONCLUSION
The research results can be useful for the development of health education and parental awareness strategies in order to promote greater adherence to vaccination against COVID-19.
Topics: Animals; Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Cross-Sectional Studies; Parents; Vaccination
PubMed: 37161546
DOI: 10.1111/cch.13124 -
Journal of Advanced Pharmaceutical... 2021Search for an effective and safe vaccine to prevent transmission of current pandemic is an unmet need. This study reviews and compares the available early phase clinical... (Review)
Review
Search for an effective and safe vaccine to prevent transmission of current pandemic is an unmet need. This study reviews and compares the available early phase clinical data of vaccine candidates which have reached phase 3 of clinical development. The latest update of "DRAFT landscape of coronavirus (CoV) disease 2019 candidate vaccines (October 2, 2020)" released by the World Health Organization was accessed to identify the potential vaccine candidates. The full text articles (published and/or preprint) of data of early clinical trials of the selected vaccines were accessed from the links provided in the same document, PubMed and/or medRxiv.com. After extraction and synthesis, the data were critically evaluated for the study efficacy and safety outcomes. Of the total 193 candidate vaccines 10 were found to reach phase 3 of the clinical development. Nine of these were included in the evaluation process. In all of the included studies, immunogenicity and serious adverse events/local or systemic adverse events/laboratory parameters abnormality was considered as efficacy and safety outcomes respectively. Immunogenicity response with most of the vaccines was either higher than or similar to the respective controls except one (recombinant adenovirus type 26 COV2 [Ad26.COV2.S]) for which it was less than that in control. Overall adverse events (related and/or unrelated) were more with vaccines than those with respective control(s) in three studies, in other two, these were similar whereas in one study, the events were less in the vaccine group than in control group and in the rest, data described were descriptive only without any mention for the same for the control. In conclusion all studies showed immunogenic response to target protein of severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV-2 and which was higher than the respective control except for Ad26.CoV2.S. Many of the vaccines caused more adverse events than the controls, however most were mild and transient and/or manageable.
PubMed: 34345597
DOI: 10.4103/japtr.JAPTR_229_20 -
Vaccines Nov 2023Delivering vaccines in humanitarian response requires rigourous and continuous analysis of evidence. This systematic review mapped the normative landscape of vaccination... (Review)
Review
Delivering vaccines in humanitarian response requires rigourous and continuous analysis of evidence. This systematic review mapped the normative landscape of vaccination guidance on vaccine-preventable diseases in crisis-affected settings. Guidance published between 2000 and 2022 was searched for, in English and French, on websites of humanitarian actors, Google, and Bing. Peer-reviewed database searches were performed in Global Health and Embase. Reference lists of all included documents were screened. We disseminated an online survey to professionals working in vaccination delivery in humanitarian contexts. There was a total of 48 eligible guidance documents, including technical guidance ( = 17), descriptive guidance ( = 16), operational guidance ( = 11), evidence reviews ( = 3), and ethical guidance ( = 1). Most were World Health Organization documents ( = 21) targeting children under 5 years of age. Critical appraisal revealed insufficient inclusion of affected populations and limited rigour in guideline development. We found limited information on vaccines including, yellow fever, cholera, meningococcal, hepatitis A, and varicella, as well as human papilloma virus (HPV). There is a plethora of vaccination guidance for vaccine-preventable diseases in humanitarian contexts. However, gaps remain in the critical and systematic inclusion of evidence, inclusion of the concept of "zero-dose" children and affected populations, ethical guidance, and specific recommendations for HPV and non-universally recommended vaccines, which must be addressed.
PubMed: 38140148
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11121743 -
Innovation (Cambridge (Mass.)) May 2021COVID-19 has spread globally to over 200 countries with more than 40 million confirmed cases and one million deaths as of November 1, 2020. The SARS-CoV-2 virus, leading... (Review)
Review
COVID-19 has spread globally to over 200 countries with more than 40 million confirmed cases and one million deaths as of November 1, 2020. The SARS-CoV-2 virus, leading to COVID-19, shows extremely high rates of infectivity and replication, and can result in pneumonia, acute respiratory distress, or even mortality. SARS-CoV-2 has been found to continue to rapidly evolve, with several genomic variants emerging in different regions throughout the world. In addition, despite intensive study of the spike protein, its origin, and molecular mechanisms in mediating host invasion are still only partially resolved. Finally, the repertoire of drugs for COVID-19 treatment is still limited, with several candidates still under clinical trial and no effective therapeutic yet reported. Although vaccines based on either DNA/mRNA or protein have been deployed, their efficacy against emerging variants requires ongoing study, with multivalent vaccines supplanting the first-generation vaccines due to their low efficacy against new strains. Here, we provide a systematic review of studies on the epidemiology, immunological pathogenesis, molecular mechanisms, and structural biology, as well as approaches for drug or vaccine development for SARS-CoV-2.
PubMed: 33997827
DOI: 10.1016/j.xinn.2021.100116 -
Tropical Medicine & International... Jun 2023Lassa fever (LF) is caused by a viral pathogen with pandemic potential. LF vaccines have the potential to prevent significant disease in individuals at risk of... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Lassa fever (LF) is caused by a viral pathogen with pandemic potential. LF vaccines have the potential to prevent significant disease in individuals at risk of infection, but no such vaccine has been licensed or authorised for use thus far. We conducted a scoping review to identify and compare registered phase 1, 2 or 3 clinical trials of LF vaccine candidates, and appraise the current trajectory of LF vaccine development.
METHOD
We systematically searched 24 trial registries, PubMed, relevant conference abstracts and additional grey literature sources up to 27 October 2022. After extracting key details about each vaccine candidate and each eligible trial, we qualitatively synthesised the evidence.
RESULTS
We found that four LF vaccine candidates (INO-4500, MV-LASV, rVSV∆G-LASV-GPC, and EBS-LASV) have entered the clinical stage of assessment. Five phase 1 trials (all focused on healthy adults) and one phase 2 trial (involving a broader age group from 18 months to 70 years) evaluating one of these vaccines have been registered to date. Here, we describe the characteristics of each vaccine candidate and trial and compare them to WHO's target product profile for Lassa vaccines.
CONCLUSION
Though LF vaccine development is still in early stages, current progress towards a safe and effective vaccine is encouraging.
Topics: Humans; Lassa Fever; Lassa virus; Viral Vaccines
PubMed: 37095630
DOI: 10.1111/tmi.13876 -
BMJ Open Aug 2022The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the vaccines' acceptance level and to find the factors influencing pregnant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the vaccines' acceptance level and to find the factors influencing pregnant women's vaccination decisions, with the goal of assisting in the development of interventions and promoting more research in this area.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PubMed.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Studies providing any kind of quantitative assessment of overall COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among pregnant women in any country or region across the globe.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women was calculated using the random-effects model. Subgroup (sensitivity) analysis was performed to determine the overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance level to understand the sources of substantial heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Out of the 375 studies identified, 17 studies from four continents assessing 25 147 participants (pregnant women) were included in this study. Among the participants, only 49% (95% CI 42% to 56%, p<0.001) had COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. High-income countries (47%; 95% CI 38% to 55%, p<0.001), participants with fewer than 12 years of education (38%; 95% CI 19% to 58%, p<0.001) and multiparous women (48%; 95% CI 31% to 66%, p<0.001) had lower COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Overall heterogeneity was high (I ≥98%), and publication bias was present (p<0.001). A very weak positive correlation between COVID-19 knowledge and COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was observed (r=0.164; 95% CI -0.946 to 0.972; p=0.8359).
CONCLUSION
Overall, COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women was low across the studies and considerably low among some specific subgroups of participants. These research findings have implications for the development of effective interventions that could increase the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance level among pregnant women to attain herd immunity.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021277754.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnant Women; Vaccination; Vaccination Hesitancy
PubMed: 35981769
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061477 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2022COVID-19 is a major public health problem that has been seriously affecting the global community. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of infection due to being...
COVID-19 is a major public health problem that has been seriously affecting the global community. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of infection due to being directly involved in diagnosing and taking care of patients. Due to this, they were prioritized to receive the initial supply of vaccines. However, vaccine hesitancy has been identified as a major global public health threat. Therefore, this review aimed to synthesize pieces of evidence on the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and determinate factors among HCWs. A systematic search of published articles was identified using PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for relevant studies of vaccine acceptance and determinant factors among HCWs. Published articles were identified using abstracts and titles of the articles, and articles were assessed for eligibility criteria. The review process was conducted according to the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). An electronic database search identified 365 articles, from which 33 full-text articles were included in the systematic review. In this review, the highest rate of vaccine acceptance was reported at 95% and the lowest rate of vaccine acceptance was found at 21%. Factors such as sex (male), age, profession (medical doctors), and previous influenza vaccination were the main positive predictors for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among HCWs. Concerns about vaccine safety, efficacy, and effectiveness were the main barriers and drivers for vaccine hesitancy. Therefore, to improve the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among HCWs, governments, public health authorities, and private healthcare systems should work together to provide continuous professional development and training on the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Health Personnel; Humans; Male; Prevalence; Vaccines
PubMed: 35968421
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.941206 -
BMC Health Services Research Sep 2014From 1999 to 2010, annual disbursements of development assistance for health for vaccinations increased from $0.5 billion to $2.0 billion (all financial values USD... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
From 1999 to 2010, annual disbursements of development assistance for health for vaccinations increased from $0.5 billion to $2.0 billion (all financial values USD 2010). In its 2012 Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP), the World Health Assembly recommended establishing a comprehensive vaccination resource tracking system to better understand the source and recipients of these funds, and ultimately their impact on outcomes. This systematic review aims to respond to the GVAP recommendation in reviewing and assessing the state of the data and literature on vaccination resource tracking.
METHODS
We scrutinized all relevant vaccination resource tracking systems identified in the literature and by practitioners in the field. We examined schemes used elsewhere in the health sector and by other sectors. Informant interviews were also conducted to determine what data exists and how it might be utilized. With this information, we completed a qualitative assessment of existing approaches to vaccination resources tracking.
RESULTS
Tracking systems provide information about some vaccine-related activity in the majority of low- and middle-income countries. Data are generally available for the period of 2006-2010. Levels of granularity vary. Interviewees were concerned about the degree of rigor used to validate the data and the lack of verification. Data are often presented in tabular form, which may be unwieldy for non-technical audiences.
CONCLUSIONS
The schemes currently in place to track the resources available for vaccinations were fairly advanced relative to other mechanisms in the health sector. Nonetheless, the coverage, validity, and accessibility of vaccination resource tracking data could be ameliorated. Establishing improved feedback loops and verification mechanisms that connect country-level administrators and the international organizations that support reporting efforts would enhance data quality.
Topics: Health Resources; Immunization Programs; International Cooperation; Vaccines
PubMed: 25246005
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-421 -
Pituitary May 2024This systematic review aims to examine the latest research findings and assess the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the pituitary gland. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
This systematic review aims to examine the latest research findings and assess the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the pituitary gland.
METHOD
PubMed and Tripdatabase were searched from January 1st, 2020 to February 12th, 2024. Case reports, case series and reviews related to post COVID-19 vaccination pituitary disease were included. Eligible articles were tabulated and analysed in the attempt to provide an overview on the epidemiology, clinical presentation, imaging, treatment, outcomes and pathophysiological background of post COVID-19 vaccination pituitary disease.
RESULTS
Among the 23 case reports included in this review, post COVID-19 vaccination hypophysitis was reported in 9 patients, pituitary apoplexy (PA) in 6 cases, SIADH in 5 cases and Isolated ACTH deficiency in 2 cases. Additionally, precipitating adrenal crisis was registered in 7 patients and pituitary tumor enlargement in 1 patient after receiving COVID-19 vaccination.
CONCLUSION
Despite the rarity of these events, our research findings suggest an association between COVID-19 vaccination and the subsequent development of pituitary diseases. The most common manifestations include hypophysitis with ADH deficiency, PA and SIADH, with symptoms typically emerging shortly after vaccine administration. Potential pathogenetic mechanisms include molecular mimicry, vaccine adjuvants and vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT), with the presence of ACE2 receptors in the hypothalamus-pituitary system contributing to the process. These findings can aid in diagnostic and treatment decisions for patients presenting with these syndromes. Nevertheless, given the rarity of these events, safety and efficacy of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines remain robust and we strongly advocate continuing pursuing vaccination efforts.
PubMed: 38761322
DOI: 10.1007/s11102-024-01402-2 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Dec 2021With limited vaccine supplies, an informed position on the status of SARS-CoV-2 infection in people can assist the prioritization of vaccine deployment. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
With limited vaccine supplies, an informed position on the status of SARS-CoV-2 infection in people can assist the prioritization of vaccine deployment.
OBJECTIVES
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the global and regional SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalences around the world.
DATA SOURCES
We systematically searched peer-reviewed databases (PubMed, Embase and Scopus), and preprint servers (medRxiv, bioRxiv and SSRN) for articles published between 1 January 2020 and 30 March 2021.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Population-based studies reporting the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in the general population were included.
PARTICIPANTS
People of different age groups, occupations, educational levels, ethnic backgrounds and socio-economic status from the general population.
INTERVENTIONS
There were no interventions.
METHODS
We used the random-effects meta-analyses and empirical Bayesian method to estimate the pooled seroprevalence and conducted subgroup and meta-regression analyses to explore potential sources of heterogeneity as well as the relationship between seroprevalence and socio-demographics.
RESULTS
We identified 241 eligible studies involving 6.3 million individuals from 60 countries. The global pooled seroprevalence was 9.47% (95% CI 8.99-9.95%), although the heterogeneity among studies was significant (I = 99.9%). We estimated that ∼738 million people had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 (as of December 2020). Highest and lowest seroprevalences were recorded in Central and Southern Asia (22.91%, 19.11-26.72%) and Eastern and South-eastern Asia (1.62%, 1.31-1.95%), respectively. Seroprevalence estimates were higher in males, persons aged 20-50 years, in minority ethnic groups living in countries or regions with low income and human development indices.
CONCLUSIONS
The present study indicates that the majority of the world's human population was still highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection in mid-2021, emphasizing the need for vaccine deployment to vulnerable groups of people, particularly in developing countries, and for the implementation of enhanced preventive measures until 'herd immunity' to SARS-CoV-2 has developed.
Topics: Bayes Theorem; COVID-19; Global Health; Humans; SARS-CoV-2; Seroepidemiologic Studies
PubMed: 34582980
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.09.019