We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To estimate COVID-19 vaccine intention, uptake, and hesitancy among essential workers.
Methods
A cross-sectional survey of USDA-certified organic producers. An electronic survey was used for data collection. Analyses included descriptive statistics, χ2 tests, and ordinal logistic regressions.
Results
The dataset consisted of 273 records. While 63% of respondents had received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine, only 17% had the recommended minimum of 2 doses. More than two-thirds of unvaccinated individuals indicated no plan to receive the vaccine, and limited perception of vaccine necessity. They indicated concerns about side effects and a distrust of the vaccines and the government. Age, education level, acreage, region, and health insurance status were variables significantly associated with the number of doses of vaccine received.
Conclusions
Interventions to encourage vaccination may target farmers who are less educated, live alone or just with one other person, lack health insurance, and run larger farms. Results also suggest focusing on enhancing trust in science and the government. Theory-based approaches that address low perception of risk and severity may be more likely to be effective with this population. Information on how US organic producers handled the COVID-19 pandemic is critical for emergency preparedness and food system stability.
Trade secrets raise three primary issues. First, if an entity is forced to share trade secrets to expedite development and to expand the supply of needed products, must or should the government compensate the rights holder? Although this chapter addresses this question, it is largely unnecessary to answer it. This is because compensation is not required under international law, and because reasonable compensation should normally be provided for compelled trade secret sharing. Second, does international law prohibit governments from compelling the sharing of trade secrets, including by compulsory licensing? The short answer is no. Third, what authorities currently exist or could be adopted for governments to compel the sharing of trade secrets? The chapter provides general overview of a range of existing authorities, as well as a framework for addressing the latter two questions and for understanding the complexity of the first question.
This chapter explores the gap between technology’s promise and our ability to realize the global public goods of vaccines and medicines. This gap stems from significant market disincentives in the R&D process, along with clinical trial challenges and regulatory hurdles. Yet a range of innovative financing strategies to delink R&D costs from vaccine and drug prices, along with well-designed and ethically run clinical trials, can fill this gap, facilitating development of urgently needed medical countermeasures.
The COVID-19 pandemic had an unprecedented impact on healthcare systems and exists globally. To control pandemic progression, COVID-19 vaccines were developed and licensed for use in the adult population in early 2021 and became available in paediatric cohorts several months later. Since then, several studies have reported adverse events and severe adverse events in the adult and paediatric cohorts. The question remains whether there exists a significant risk to paediatric COVID-19 vaccination. This study reviews the classification and presentation of severe adverse events and discusses relevant reports in the literature. An emphasis is put on cardiovascular severe adverse events and adverse events. This paper also provides current and future perspectives relative to the pandemic, its control, and the future of vaccine immunology.
As has been the case outsideAfrica, African countries have experienced multiple consequences from the COVID-19 pandemic that extend beyond its immediate impact on human health. In Africa, much like elsewhere in the world, the pandemic has had a significant economic impact, leading to profound global economic distress. African countries have also experienced consequences that are unlike those of much of the rest of the world. For example, the pandemic has contributed to a sovereign debt crisis that led to sovereign defaults by Zambia in late 2020, Mali in early 2022, and Ghana in late 2022, and might lead to additional defaults. Travel bans and COVID-19 vaccine exclusion are key policies that have also had a particular impact in Africa. These and other COVID-19 policies in African contexts reflect patterns of exclusion that are at least in part a consequence of continuing colonial hangover.
Authors in this volume make a wide range of important proposals on intellectual property, innovation, and access. The question this chapter asks is: which of these might work in an actual pandemic? By tracing the first year of COVID-19 vaccine distribution, it shows the critical importance of aligning choice of policy mechanisms with political forces. Indeed, it argues that an openness paradigm may have been more effective not only for reasons of justice, but because it could accommodate populist politics and vaccine nationalism.
At the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous observers recognized the potential for patents and other intellectual property (IP) rights to hinder the development and dissemination of medical equipment and products responsive to the virus. Concerns over the impact of IP rights on pandemic response led to a range of national and international governmental interventions. Yet these concerns also spurred voluntary, private action by IP rights holders. This chapter discusses and assesses these private initiatives, with a focus on the Open Covid Pledge (OCP), an initiative that the author helped to organize. The OCP eventually led to the voluntary commitment of an estimated 500,000 patents to the COVID-19 response, was endorsed by Universities Allied for Essential Medicines (UAEM) and adopted by the WHO’s Covid Technology Access Pool (C-TAP) as a recommended mechanism for making technology available in the COVID-19 response.
This chapter proposes resurrecting the best mode requirement of patentability and potentially extending disclosure obligations for a finite period of time after patent filing. It further argues that government agencies can leverage public research and procurement funds to promote greater technical disclosure by private innovators. Such measures can increase the disclosure of latent knowledge and codified trade secrets. However, transferring purely tacit knowledge, which is not amenable to codification, often requires direct interaction between technology generators and adopters. This chapter cautions against requiring such intensive tacit knowledge transfer as part of the patent quid pro quo. However, it suggests leveraging public investment in private innovation and building knowledge-sharing infrastructure to facilitate such transfer.
The enduring impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health and its implications for COVID-19 vaccine uptake necessitate comprehensive investigation. We aimed to characterize the persistence of moderate to severe anxiety and depression symptoms from July 2020 to July 2023, explore demographic associations with symptom persistence, and assess how these symptoms affected COVID-19 vaccination uptake between May 2021 and July 2023.
Methods
Participants from the national community-based CHASING COVID Cohort were enrolled between March and June 2020 and completed quarterly follow-ups until December 2023. Scores ≥10 on the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item and the Patient Health Questionnaire 8-item at 14 follow-up assessments indicated moderate to severe anxiety and depression symptoms, respectively. Missing scores were imputed. Persistent anxiety and depression were defined as experiencing moderate to severe anxiety and depression symptoms ≥7 out of 14 follow-up assessments, respectively.
Results
Among 4,851 participants, 15.9% experienced persistent anxiety symptoms and 19.3% persistent depression symptoms from July 2020 to July 2023. Demographic factors associated with symptom persistence included younger age, female or non-binary gender, Hispanic ethnicity, lower education level, household income <$100k, presence of children <18 in the household, greater healthcare barriers and comorbidities. Participants with ongoing moderate to severe anxiety and depression symptoms had 0.95 (95% CI: 0.94, 0.97) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93, 0.96) times rates of receiving additional COVID-19 vaccine doses between May 2021 and July 2023, respectively.
Conclusions
Customized support for individuals with mental disorders may mitigate barriers to vaccine uptake. Further investigation is warranted to validate these findings and inform targeted interventions.
To contain the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), several vaccines have been developed. This study is intended to elucidate the level of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 immunoglobulin G (anti-SARS-CoV-2-IgG) antibodies for COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer BioNTech [BNT162b2], Oxford/AstraZeneca [ChAdOx1], and Sinopharm [BBIBP-CorV]) among health staff from health facilities in Duhok province, and it explored the immediate adverse reactions of COVID-19 vaccines among participants.
Methods:
A longitudinal study was conducted from June 1, 2021, to June 30, 2022, and 300 participants were included through simple random sampling.
Results:
The immune response 1 mo after the second dose was significantly higher than the sustained immune after 5 and 9 mo as results revealed that, in 100% of study samples who had (ChAdOx1) vaccine, their antibody titers exceeded the positivity threshold of 1 AU/m, while 96% for (BNT162b2) and 90% for (BBIBP-CorV) for the first test after 1 mo from the second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, and these rates were reduced to 94.6% for (ChAdOx1), 97.8% for (BNT162b2), and 81.9% for (BBIBP-CorV) at 5 mo after the second dose, while simultaneously the seropositivity rates were more reduced at 9 mo to 46.5% for (ChAdOx1), 67.5% for (BNT162b2), and 9.20% for (BBIBP-CorV). In terms of adverse reactionsss, fever was reported as the most prevalent after the first dose in 58% for ChAdOx1, 43% for BNT162b2, and 23% for BBIBP-CorV, followed by muscle pain, joint pain, and shoulder pain for both doses.
Conclusions:
The implications of the findings from this study are that higher and potentially longer antibody responses can be obtained if the BNT162b2 is given as compared with the other 2 vaccines. Moreover, the booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccine are highly recommended because more than 50% of the participants either have become anti-spike protein negative or have a deficient level of anti-spike protein against COVD-19 vaccines.
For the purpose of this chapter, we are going to frame the immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) through a targeted and simplistic approach. SARS-CoV-2 invades and infects host cells via interaction of its spike protein with mucosal membrane receptor angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). The immune system response can be quite variable and depends on multiple factors, some specific to the virus and others specific to the patient’s immune competence or clinical comorbidities. SARS-CoV-2 can also be unusually effective at evading the triggering of early innate immune responses, such as type 1 interferons and related molecules. It is possible that much of the nature of COVID-19 as an illness is a consequence of this one evasion trick of SARS-CoV-2. In this chapter, we will describe this immune response and discuss mechanisms by which the virus actively seeks to evade our immune system. We will also discuss how we dissect the body’s immune response to assist us in identifying therapeutic and prophylactic targets and with the development of vaccines, and we will look at the effectiveness of these targets on morbidity and mortality and their adverse reaction profiles.
This article highlights and evaluates the role of CEPI and its contribution to global equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines through its established partnerships for vaccine development. The article adds to the understanding of how and when such partnerships can work for public health, especially under emergency citations.
We present a 13-year-old boy who had recurrent chest pain with elevated cardiac enzymes and abnormal ST segments in electrocardiogram 36 hours after the second dose of BNT162b2 vaccination. Cardiac MRI and coronary angiography with acetylcholine provocation confirmed myocarditis and vasospastic angina, respectively. Coronary vasospasm may play a pivotal role in the chest pain in COVID-19 vaccine-related myocarditis.
Hesitancy towards the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine has been a topic of considerable concern in recent months. Studies have reported hesitancy within the general population and specific facets of the health care system. Little evidence has been published about vaccine hesitancy among Emergency Medical Services (EMS) providers despite them having played a frontline role throughout the pandemic.
Methods:
A 27-question survey examining vaccination decisions and potential influencing factors among EMS providers was created and disseminated. Responses from providers who declined a COVID-19 vaccine were compared with responses from providers who did not decline a COVID-19 vaccine.
Results:
Across 166 respondents, 16% reported declining a COVID-19 vaccine. Providers who self-identified as men, providers who reported conservative or conservative-leaning beliefs, and providers surrounded by environments where the vaccine was discussed negatively or not encouraged are significantly more likely to decline a vaccine (P <.01). Providers who have declined a vaccine reported significantly greater levels of concern about its safety, effectiveness, and development (P <.01).
Conclusion:
This study answers key questions about why some EMS providers might be declining COVID-19 vaccinations. Initiatives to improve vaccination among EMS providers should focus on the areas highlighted, and further studies should continue to examine vaccine hesitancy among EMS providers as well as in other populations.
With the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, the aging population has been shown to be highly vulnerable. As a result, policy makers and the media urged older adults to restrict social interactions, placing them at greater risk of mental health problems, such as depression. However, there has been a little previous attempt to examine coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccine-related risk factors and depressive symptoms amongst older adults.
Methods
Participants (938 older adults, Mage = 68.99, s.d. = 3.41, range 65–85) answered an online questionnaire at the start of the COVID-19 vaccination program in Israel. Participants completed measures of background characteristics, world assumptions, COVID-19 vaccine-related variables, and symptoms of depression.
Results
Univariate logistic regression revealed that more negative world assumptions were linked with clinical depression levels.
Conclusions
Older adults in our sample were susceptible to unique factors associated with clinical depression influenced by their world assumptions during their COVID-19 vaccination. The high level of depression following vaccination indicates that it may take time to recover from depression associated with pandemic distress. Cognitive interventions that focus on world assumptions are recommended.
The COVID-19 global pandemic required the rapid development of vaccines with a quick start up of phase 1–3 studies with large enrollment targets. The University of California San Diego was identified as a site for the phase 3 trial of the mRNA-1273-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. There were many challenges with scaling up a large-scale clinical trial in such a short time. This report describes the processes and procedures that were implemented to successfully complete the enrollment target in under 10 weeks. This required the team to identify existing tools that could rapidly be accessed to develop a database, scheduling system, effective communication, document management, staff time tracking/efficiency, subject scheduling/tracking, project management, and accrual/study performance. The outcome of these efforts resulted in rapid enrollment and study completion in a short time. The lessons learned from this experience can be used by other clinical trial sites faced with similar challenges.
Little is known about the decision-making process of college students in Lebanon regarding coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. The aim of this study was to identify factors predicting behavioural intentions of students enrolled at the American University of Beirut to obtain a COVID-19 vaccine. A total of 3805 students were randomly selected. Participants were divided into three groups: vaccine accepting (willing to take or already took the vaccine), vaccine hesitant (hesitant to take the vaccine) and vaccine resistant (decided not to take the vaccine). Overall, participants were vaccine accepting (87%), with 10% and 3% being hesitant and resistant, respectively. Vaccine hesitancy was significantly associated with nationality, residency status and university rank. Participants who believed the vaccine was safe and in agreement with their personal views were less likely to be hesitant. Participants who did not receive the flu vaccine were more hesitant than those who did. Moreover, a significant association between hesitancy and agreement with conspiracies was observed. A high level of knowledge about COVID-19 disease and vaccine resulted in lower odds of vaccine resistance among students. The factors identified explaining each of the three vaccine intention groups can be used as core content for health communication and social marketing campaigns to increase the rate of COVID-19 vaccination.
Patients with coronavirus disease vaccine associated lymphadenopathy are increasingly being referred to healthcare services. This work is the first to report on the incidence, clinical course and imaging features of coronavirus disease vaccine associated cervical lymphadenopathy, with special emphasis on the implications for head and neck cancer services.
Methods
This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients referred to our head and neck cancer clinics between 16 December 2020 and 12 March 2021. The main outcomes measured were the proportion of patients with vaccine-associated cervical lymphadenopathy, and the clinical and imaging characteristics.
Results
The incidence of vaccine-associated cervical lymphadenopathy referrals was 14.8 per cent (n = 13). Five patients (38.5 per cent) had abnormal-looking enlarged and rounded nodes with increased vascularity. Only seven patients (53.9 per cent) reported full resolution within an average of 3.1 ± 2.3 weeks.
Conclusion
Coronavirus disease vaccine associated cervical lymphadenopathy can mimic malignant lymphadenopathy and therefore might prove challenging to diagnose and manage correctly. Healthcare services may encounter a significant increase in referrals.
Patients with mental illness are at an increased risk of COVID-19 infection, morbidity, and mortality, and prioritisation of this group for COVID-19 vaccination programmes has therefore been suggested. Vaccine uptake may, however, be compromised by vaccine hesitancy amongst patients with mental illness, posing a critical public health issue. We conducted two surveys to provide weighted estimates of vaccine willingness amongst patients with mental illness and the general population of Denmark. Vaccine willingness was high in both groups, but slightly lower amongst patients with mental illness (84.8%), compared with the general population (89.5%) (p < .001). Based on these findings, vaccine hesitancy does not appear to be a major barrier for vaccine uptake amongst patients with mental illness in Denmark, but may be so in other countries with lower general vaccine willingness. Replication of the present study in other countries is strongly warranted.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.