COVID-19 as the Leading Cause of Death in the United States

Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Bereaved: A Study of Bereaved Weibo Users

The global COVID-19 pandemic may significantly affect the experiences of death and bereavement. This study aimed to learn from recent outbreaks of infectious diseases and further understand their impacts on bereavement. We obtained psychological status scores for 32 individuals bereaved due to COVID-19 and 127 individuals bereaved due to non-COVID-19 causes using the online ecological recognition (OER) approach. Next, a sentiment analysis and independent sample t-test were performed to examine the differences between these two groups. The results indicated that the individuals bereaved due to COVID-19 were more insecure and more preoccupied with the grief of the moment than those bereaved due to non-COVID-19 reasons, while the latter group had higher depression scores than the former group. This study can guide policy-makers and clinical practitioners to provide more targeted and sustainable post-bereavement support for both bereaved groups during the COVID-19 period.

The relationship between mobility and COVID-19 pandemic: Daily evidence from an emerging country by causality analysis

This study examines the relationship between mobility (a proxy for transport) and the COVID-19 pandemic by focusing on Turkey as an example of an emerging country. In this context, eight types of mobility and two indicators of COVID-19 were analyzed using daily data from March 11, 2020 to December 7, 2020 by applying Toda-Yamamoto causality test. The findings revealed that (i) there is cointegration between the variables in the long term; (ii) there is an econometric causality between mobility indicators (mobility of grocery, park, residential, retail, and workplace) and pandemic indicators; (iii) various mobility indicators have an econometric causality with different pandemic indicators; (iv) neither driving mobility nor walking mobility has an econometric causality with the pandemic indicators whereas some of the other types of mobility, such as grocery, park, and retail do. These results generally show the effects of mobility and highlight the importance of appropriate mobility restrictions in terms of the pandemic.

Positive Predictive Value of ICD-10 Diagnosis Codes for COVID-19

Purpose

To examine the positive predictive value (PPV) of International Classification version 10 (ICD-10) diagnosis codes for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Patients and Methods

Medical record review of all patients assigned a diagnosis code of COVID-19 (DB342A or DB972A) at six Danish departments of infectious diseases from February 27 through May 4, 2020. Confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis was defined as either: 1) definite, a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on a respiratory sample combined with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19: 2) probable, clinical presentation of COVID-19 without detection of SARS-CoV-2 and no alternative diagnoses considered more likely; or 3) possible, clinical presentation of COVID-19 without detection of SARS-CoV-2, and the patient was discharged or deceased before further investigations were carried out. We computed the PPV with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as the number of patients with confirmed (i.e., definite, probable, and possible) COVID-19 divided by the number of patients assigned a diagnosis code for COVID-19.

Results

The study included 710 patients with a median age of 61 years (interquartile range [IQR] 47–74) and 285/710 (40%) were female. COVID-19 was confirmed in 706/710 (99%) with 705/710 (99%) categorized as definite, 1/710 (0.1%) as probable, and 0 patients as possible COVID-19. The diagnosis was disproven in 4/710 (0.6%) patients who were hospitalized due to bacterial pneumonia (n = 2), influenza (n = 1), and urinary tract infection (n = 1). The overall PPV for COVID-19 was 99% (95% CI 99–100) and remained consistently high among all subgroups including sex, age groups, calendar period, and stratified by diagnosis code and department of infectious diseases (range 97–100%).

Conclusion

The overall PPV of diagnosis codes for COVID-19 in Denmark was high and may be suitable for future registry-based prognosis studies of COVID-19.

A Midwest COVID-19 Cohort for the Evaluation of Multimorbidity and Adverse Outcomes from COVID-19

Objective

To describe the process and outcome of creating a patient cohort in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in order to better understand the process of and predict the outcomes of COVID-19.

Patients and Methods

A total of 1169 adults aged 18 years of age or older who tested positive in Mayo Clinic Rochester or the Mayo Clinic Midwest Health System between January 1 and May 23 of 2020.

Results

Patients were on average 43.9 years of age and 50.7% were female. Most patients were white (69.0%), and Blacks (23.4%) and Asians (5.8%) were also represented in larger numbers. Hispanics represented 16.3% of the sample. Just under half of patients were married (48.4%). Common comorbid conditions included: cardiovascular diseases (25.1%), dyslipidemia (16.0%), diabetes mellitus (11.2%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (6.6%), asthma (7.5%), and cancer (5.1%). All other comorbid conditions were less the 5% in prevalence. Data on 3 comorbidity indices are also available including the: DHHS multi-morbidity score, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and Mayo Clinic COVID-19 Risk Factor Score.

Conclusion

In addition to managing the ever raging pandemic and growing death rates, it is equally important that we develop adequate resources for the investigation and understanding of COVID-19-related predictors and outcomes.

Medication Treatments for Youth and Young Adults With Opioid Use Disorder

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths are increasingly prevalent among youth and young adults; however, the evidence-based medication-assisted treatments (MATs) that have U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of adults are not approved for persons aged 16 to 18 years. New guidelines from the American Society of Addiction Medicine provide information on the risks and benefits of MAT with youth and young adults that help guide decision making. Clinical decisions require a thorough physical and psychiatric evaluation, risk/benefit analysis in treatment planning, and collaboration with youth and young adults to engage support systems. The current article presents an overview of the three available maintenance treatments for youth and young adults with OUD. [Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 59(5), 9-13.].

The psychological effects of the COVID-19 pandemic: an introduction to the special issue

This paper briefly introduces the Special Issue "The Psychological Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic." In doing so, it first outlines the initial call for papers and some of the general contours of the issue before then offering a terse summary of the larger themes offered in each of the six papers included in this volume. Some final summary remarks and larger suggestions for additional work in this area are also noted.

Collaborative Cohort of Cohorts for COVID-19 Research (C4R) Study: Study Design

The Collaborative Cohort of Cohorts for COVID-19 Research (C4R) is a national prospective study of adults at risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) comprising 14 established United States (US) prospective cohort studies. For decades, C4R cohorts have collected extensive data on clinical and subclinical diseases and their risk factors, including behavior, cognition, biomarkers, and social determinants of health. C4R will link this pre-COVID phenotyping to information on SARS-CoV-2 infection and acute and post-acute COVID-related illness. C4R is largely population-based, has an age range of 18-108 years, and broadly reflects the racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic diversity of the US. C4R is ascertaining severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and COVID-19 illness using standardized questionnaires, ascertainment of COVID-related hospitalizations and deaths, and a SARS-CoV-2 serosurvey via dried blood spots. Master protocols leverage existing robust retention rates for telephone and in-person examinations, and high-quality events surveillance. Extensive pre-pandemic data minimize referral, survival, and recall bias. Data are being harmonized with research-quality phenotyping unmatched by clinical and survey-based studies; these will be pooled and shared widely to expedite collaboration and scientific findings. This unique resource will allow evaluation of risk and resilience factors for COVID-19 severity and outcomes, including post-acute sequelae, and assessment of the social and behavioral impact of the pandemic on long-term trajectories of health and aging.

Repurposing Anti-Malaria Phytomedicine Artemisinin as a COVID-19 Drug

Artemisinin is an anti-inflammatory phytomedicine with broad-spectrum antiviral activity. Artemisinin and its antimalarial properties were discovered by the Chinese scientist Tu Youyu, who became one of the laureates of the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for this breakthrough in tropical medicine. It is a commonly used anti-malaria drug. Artemisinin has recently been repurposed as a potential COVID-19 drug. Its documented anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity has been attributed to its ability to inhibit spike-protein mediated and TGF-β-dependent early steps in the infection process as well as its ability to disrupt the post-entry intracellular events of the SARS-CoV-2 infection cycle required for viral replication. In addition, Artemisinin has anti-inflammatory activity and reduces the systemic levels of inflammatory cytokines that contribute to cytokine storm and inflammatory organ injury in high-risk COVID-19 patients. We postulate that Artemisinin may prevent the worsening of the health condition of patients with mild-moderate COVID-19 when administered early in the course of their disease.

Perspectives on the receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine: A survey of employees in two large hospitals in Philadelphia

BACKGROUND

Health care personnel have been identified by the ACIP as a priority group for COVID-19 vaccination. We conducted a survey in November-December 2020 at two large, academic hospitals in Philadelphia to evaluate the intention of hospital employees to be vaccinated.

METHODS

The survey was sent electronically to all employees (clinical and nonclinical staff) at a children's hospital and an adult hospital. The survey was voluntary and confidential. Questions focused on plans to receive a COVID-19 vaccine when available, reasons why employees would/would not get vaccinated, when employees planned to be vaccinated, vaccine safety and efficacy features that would be acceptable, and past history of receipt of other vaccines by the employee and family. Responses were analyzed using univariate and multiple logistic regression methods.

RESULTS

A total of 12,034 hospital employees completed the survey (a 34.5% response rate). Overall, 63.7% of employees reported that they planned to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, 26.3% were unsure, and 10.0% did not plan to be vaccinated. Over 80% of those unsure or unwilling to be vaccinated expressed concerns about vaccine side effects and the vaccines' newness. In multivariable logistic regression, persons planning to take a COVID-19 vaccine were more likely to be older, male, more educated, Asian or White, up-to-date on vaccinations, without direct patient contact, and tested for COVID-19 in the past. No significant difference in intention to be vaccinated was found between those with higher versus lower levels of exposure to COVID-19 patients or the number of previous exposures to patients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

While the majority of hospital employees are planning to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, many are unsure or not planning to do so. Further education of hospital employees about the safety, efficacy, and value of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines is critical to vaccine acceptance in this population.

Self-Reported Real-World Safety and Reactogenicity of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Vaccine Recipient Survey

An online survey was conducted to compare the safety, tolerability and reactogenicity of available COVID-19 vaccines in different recipient groups. This survey was launched in February 2021 and ran for 11 days. Recipients of a first COVID-19 vaccine dose ≥7 days prior to survey completion were eligible. The incidence and severity of vaccination side effects were assessed. The survey was completed by 2002 respondents of whom 26.6% had a prior COVID-19 infection. A prior COVID-19 infection was associated with an increased risk of any side effect (risk ratio 1.08, 95% confidence intervals (1.05-1.11)), fever (2.24 (1.86-2.70)), breathlessness (2.05 (1.28-3.29)), flu-like illness (1.78 (1.51-2.10)), fatigue (1.34 (1.20-1.49)) and local reactions (1.10 (1.06-1.15)). It was also associated with an increased risk of severe side effects leading to hospital care (1.56 (1.14-2.12)). While mRNA vaccines were associated with a higher incidence of any side effect (1.06 (1.01-1.11)) compared with viral vector-based vaccines, these were generally milder (p < 0.001), mostly local reactions. Importantly, mRNA vaccine recipients reported a considerably lower incidence of systemic reactions (RR < 0.6) including anaphylaxis, swelling, flu-like illness, breathlessness and fatigue and of side effects requiring hospital care (0.42 (0.31-0.58)). Our study confirms the findings of recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrating that COVID-19 vaccines are generally safe with limited severe side effects. For the first time, our study links prior COVID-19 illness with an increased incidence of vaccination side effects and demonstrates that mRNA vaccines cause milder, less frequent systemic side effects but more local reactions.

Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Toward COVID-19 Pandemic Among Population Visiting Dessie Health Center for COVID-19 Screening, Northeast Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) is currently a global health threat and an international public health emergency. As of 21 January 2021, 97.8 million cases with more than two million deaths were recorded worldwide while in Ethiopia 132,326 confirmed cases and 2057 deaths were reported. Hence, the aim of the present study was to determine the magnitude of knowledge, attitude, and practice toward COVID-19 among the population who visited the health center for COVID-19 screening.

METHODS

A health institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted among the 384 study population visiting Dessie health center for COVID-19 screening from September 1, to October 21, 2020 using a simple random sampling technique. A structured questionnaire was used to obtain information related to sociodemographic characteristics, Knowledge (eleven questions), attitude (six questions) and practice (nin questions). Both bivariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses with a 95% confidence interval were used to identify factors associated with poor knowledge and practice. A P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Out of the total study participants 61.5% were males, 52.6% of them were aged between 30 and 49 years and 85.2% of them were living in urban areas. The magnitude of poor knowledge and poor practice was 187 (48.7%) and 160 (41.7%), respectively. Poor knowledge had statistically significant association with Illiteracy (AOR= 5.53, 95%CI= 1.03-29.68, P= 0.046) and having no contact history (AOR=0.39, 95%CI=0.21-0.73, P=0.003). Statistically significant association existed between poor practice and parameters which addressed educational status, travel history, and poor knowledge level of study participants.

CONCLUSION

Alarmingly high poor knowledge, negatively skewed attitude, and poor practice regarding the COVID-19 pandemic was indicated. Therefore, health education programs aimed at mobilizing and improving COVID-19-related knowledge, attitude, and practice are urgently needed, especially for those who are illiterate, having travel and contact history, or generally among underprivileged populations.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Underserved Communities of North Carolina

Background

In the United States, underserved communities including Blacks and Latinx are disproportionately affected by COVID-19, and widespread vaccination is critical for curbing this pandemic. This study sought to estimate the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, describe attitudes related to vaccination, and identify correlates among racial minority and marginalized populations across 9 counties in North Carolina.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey with a self-administered questionnaire distributed at free COVID-19 testing events in underserved rural and urban communities from August 27 - December 15, 2020. Vaccine hesitancy was defined as the response of "no" or "don't know/not sure" to whether the participant would get the COVID-19 vaccine as soon as it became available.

Results

The sample comprised 948 participants including 27.7% Whites, 59.6% Blacks, 12.7% Latinx, and 63% female. Thirty-two percent earned <$20K annually, 60% owned a computer and ∼80% had internet access at home. The prevalence of vaccine hesitancy was 68.9% including 62.7%, 74%, and 59.5% among Whites, Blacks, and Latinx, respectively. Between September and December, the largest decline in vaccine hesitancy occurred among Whites (27.5 percentage points), followed by Latinx (17.6) and the smallest decline was among Black respondents (12.0). 51.2% of the respondents reported vaccine safety concerns, 23.7% wanted others to get of the respondents reported they would trust health care providers with information about the COVID-19 vaccine. Factors associated with hesitancy in multivariable logistic regression included being female (OR=1.90 95%CI[1.36, 2.64]), being Black (OR=1.68 [1.106 2.45]), calendar month (OR=0.76 [0.63, 0.92]), safety concerns (OR=4.28 [3.06, 5.97]), and government distrust (OR=3.57 [2.26, 5.63]).

Conclusions

This study reached underserved minority populations in a number of different locations to investigate COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. We built on existing relationships and further engaged the community, stake holders and health department to provide free COVID-19 testing. This direct approach permitted assessment of vaccine hesitancy (which was much higher than national estimates), distrust, and safety concerns.

Highlights

This study surveyed 948 adults at COVID-19 testing sites in 9 counties of North Carolina between August 27 and December 15, 2020 where vaccine hesitancy was widespread including 74% in Blacks, 62.7% in Whites and 59.5% in Latinx.Vaccine hesitancy declined over time but remained high for Blacks.On-site surveys conducted in underserved areas that were paper-based and self-administered permitted reaching adults with no internet (17%), no cell phone (20%), no computer (40%) and yearly incomes less than 20K (31%).Widespread vaccine hesitancy in predominately minority communities of NC must be addressed to successfully implement mass COVID-19 vaccination programs.

DrugWAS: Leveraging drug-wide association studies to facilitate drug repurposing for COVID-19

Importance: There is an unprecedented need to rapidly identify safe and effective treatments for the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To systematically investigate if any of the available drugs in Electronic Health Record (EHR), including prescription drugs and dietary supplements, can be repurposed as potential treatment for COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Based on a retrospective cohort analysis of EHR data, drug-wide association studies (DrugWAS) were performed on COVID-19 patients at Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC). For each drug study, multivariable logistic regression with overlap weighting using propensity score was applied to estimate the effect of drug exposure on COVID-19 disease outcomes. Exposures: Patient exposure to a drug during 1-year prior to the pandemic and COVID-19 diagnosis was chosen as exposure of interest. Natural language processing was employed to extract drug information from clinical notes, in addition to the prescription drug data available in structured format. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause of death was selected as primary outcome. Hospitalization, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and need for mechanical ventilation were identified as secondary outcomes. Results: The study included 7,768 COVID-19 patients, of which 509 (6.55%) were hospitalized, 82 (1.06%) were admitted to ICU, 64 (0.82%) received mechanical ventilation, and 90 (1.16%) died. Overall, 15 drugs were significantly associated with decreased COVID-19 severity. Previous exposure to either Streptococcus pneumoniae vaccines (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.14-0.98), diphtheria toxoid vaccine (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.15-0.98), and tetanus toxoid vaccine (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.15-0.98) were significantly associated with a decreased risk of death (primary outcome). Secondary analyses identified several other significant associations showing lower risk for COVID-19 outcomes: 2 vaccines (acellular pertussis, Streptococcus pneumoniae), 3 dietary supplements (turmeric extract, flaxseed extract, omega-3 fatty acids), methylprednisolone acetate, pseudoephedrine, ethinyl estradiol, estradiol, ibuprofen, and fluticasone. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study leveraged EHR data to identify a list of drugs that could be repurposed to improve COVID-19 outcomes. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to investigate the efficacy of the proposed drugs.

Early Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the United States Construction Industry

The COVID-19 pandemic has been the largest global health crisis in decades. Apart from the unprecedented number of deaths and hospitalizations, the pandemic has resulted in economic slowdowns, widespread business disruptions, and significant hardships. This study focused on investigating the early impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the U.S. construction industry since the declaration of the national emergency on 13 March 2020. The study objectives were achieved through 34 telephone interviews with project managers, engineers, designers, and superintendents that represented different states and distinct industry sectors in the United States (U.S.). The interviewees offered information on their experience with the pandemic, including the general and adverse effects experienced, new opportunities created, and risk management efforts being undertaken. The reported adverse effects included significant delays on projects, inability to secure materials on time, reduction in productivity rates, material price escalations, and others. The new opportunities that were created included projects involving the fast-track construction of medical facilities, construction of residential buildings, transportation-related work, and opportunities to recruit skilled workers. The risk management measures that were widely adopted included measures to enhance safety and reduce other project risks. The safety measures adopted included requiring employees to wear cloth face masks, adoption of social distancing protocols, staggering of construction operations, offering COVID-19-related training, administering temperature checks prior to entry into the workplace, and others. Measures to manage other project risks included the formation of a task force team to review the evolving pandemic and offer recommendations, advocating that construction businesses be deemed essential to combat delays and taking advantage of government relief programs. The study findings will be useful to industry stakeholders interested in understanding the early impacts of the pandemic on the construction industry. Industry stakeholders may also build upon the reported findings and establish best practices for continued safe and productive operations.

Covid-19: One year on…

Ron Fricker assesses the impact of the pandemic in the United States by calculating the number of "excess deaths".

Estimation of COVID-19 Epidemiology Curve of the United States Using Genetic Programming Algorithm

Estimation of the epidemiology curve for the COVID-19 pandemic can be a very computationally challenging task. Thus far, there have been some implementations of artificial intelligence (AI) methods applied to develop epidemiology curve for a specific country. However, most applied AI methods generated models that are almost impossible to translate into a mathematical equation. In this paper, the AI method called genetic programming (GP) algorithm is utilized to develop a symbolic expression (mathematical equation) which can be used for the estimation of the epidemiology curve for the entire U.S. with high accuracy. The GP algorithm is utilized on the publicly available dataset that contains the number of confirmed, deceased and recovered patients for each U.S. state to obtain the symbolic expression for the estimation of the number of the aforementioned patient groups. The dataset consists of the latitude and longitude of the central location for each state and the number of patients in each of the goal groups for each day in the period of 22nd January 2020-3rd December 2020. The obtained symbolic expressions for each state are summed up to obtain symbolic expressions for estimation of each of the patient groups (confirmed, deceased and recovered). These symbolic expressions are combined to obtain the symbolic expression for the estimation of the epidemiology curve for the entire U.S. The obtained symbolic expressions for the estimation of the number of confirmed, deceased and recovered patients for each state achieved R2 score in the ranges 0.9406-0.9992, 0.9404-0.9998 and 0.9797-0.99955, respectively. These equations are summed up to formulate symbolic expressions for the estimation of the number of confirmed, deceased and recovered patients for the entire U.S. with achieved R2 score of 0.9992, 0.9997 and 0.9996, respectively. Using these symbolic expressions, the equation for the estimation of the epidemiology curve for the entire U.S. is formulated which achieved R2 score of 0.9933. Investigation showed that GP algorithm can produce symbolic expressions for the estimation of the number of confirmed, recovered and deceased patients as well as the epidemiology curve not only for the states but for the entire U.S. with very high accuracy.

Patterns of Suicide in the Context of COVID-19: Evidence From Three Australian States

Aims: We aimed to determine whether there has been a change in the number of suicides occurring in three Australian states overall, and in age and sex subgroups, since the COVID-19 pandemic began, and to see if certain risk factors for suicide have become more prominent as likely underlying contributing factors for suicide. Method: Using real-time data from three state-based suicide registers, we ran multiple unadjusted and adjusted interrupted time series analyses to see if trends in monthly suicide counts changed after the pandemic began and whether there had been an increase in suicides where relationship breakdown, financial stressors, unemployment and homelessness were recorded. Results: Compared with the period before COVID-19, during the COVID-19 period there was no change in the number of suicides overall, or in any stratum-specific estimates except one. The exception was an increase in the number of young males who died by suicide in the COVID-19 period (adjusted RR 1.89 [95% CI 1.11-3.23]). The unadjusted analysis showed significant differences in suicide in the context of unemployment and relationship breakdown during the COVID-19 compared to the pre-COVID-19 period. Analysis showed an increase in the number of suicides occurring in the context of unemployment in the COVID-19 period (unadjusted RR 1.53 [95% CI 1.18-1.96]). In contrast, there was a decrease in the number of suicides occurring in the context of relationship breakdown in the COVID-19 period (unadjusted RR 0.82 [95% CI 0.67-0.99]). However, no significant changes were identified when the models were adjusted for possible over-dispersion, seasonality and non-linear trend. Conclusion: Although our analysis found no evidence of an overall increase in suicides after the pandemic began, the picture is complex. The identified increase in suicide in young men indicates that the impact of the pandemic is likely unevenly distributed across populations. The increase in suicides in the context of unemployment reinforces the vital need for mitigation measures during COVID-19, and for ongoing monitoring of suicide as the pandemic continues.

The (Contrasted) Ethics of Covid-19 and HIV: Will the Favor be Returned?

With 118,000 cases in 114 countries and 4291 global mortalities, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11, 2020. The origins were believed to be from Wuhan, China, and SARS CoV-2, a coronavirus, was quickly identified as the causative organism. Researchers at the National Institute of Health Vaccine Research Center identified the spike protein as the critical portion of the virus that allows for attachment to human cells. In just 66 days after identifying the genetic sequence, the first COVID-19 vaccine candidate began the enrollment of human subjects into a Phase I clinical trial. This accelerated effort was due to a collective and collaborative global response. Currently, one COVID-19 vaccine has been approved and two others have received an emergency use authorization (EUA) from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Thus, there has been a clear comparison of the COVID-19 response efforts and that which was utilized in addressing the human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) epidemic. For over four decades, the HIV/AIDS epidemic has been historically defined by a disproportionate number of infections and related mortalities amongst racially and ethnically minoritized individuals, including those that identify as homosexual. While novel drug therapies have been developed for the treatment of HIV/AIDS; there have been key components employed amid the global health response to COVID-19, that have been absent from the management of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Majorly, the development and availability of vaccine against HIV/AIDS. Many of the ideas and initiatives that have resulted in a positive COVID-19 response and the eventual successful vaccination development; have been those learned from the trial and error of mitigating increasing global rates of HIV/AIDS infections. Hence, the question remains as to whether the lessons and approaches learned during the COVID-19 pandemic, namely vaccination development, will be applied to managing the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Herein, we aim to compare the HIV/AIDS epidemic and COVID-19 pandemic, by describing how the fight against HIV/AIDs equipped global scientific leaders with effective strategies to overcome future public health crises (COVID-19), discuss the ethical considerations associated with the differences in the global health responses to the HIV/ AIDS epidemic versus the COVID-19 pandemic, and finally, identify lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic that can be applied to the quest for an HIV/AIDS vaccine..

The COVID-19 vaccination experience in Bangladesh: Findings from a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

Vaccination rollout against COVID-19 has started in developed countries in early December 2020. Mass immunization for poor or low-income countries is quite challenging before 2023. Being a lower-middle-income country, Bangladesh has begun a nationwide COVID-19 vaccination drive in early February 2021. Here, we aimed to assess the opinions, experiences, and adverse events of the COVID-19 vaccination in Bangladesh.

METHODS

We conducted this online cross-sectional study from 10 February 2021, to 10 March 2021, in Bangladesh. A self-reported semi-structured survey questionnaire was used using Google forms. We recorded demographics, disease history, medication records, opinions and experiences of vaccination, and associated adverse events symptoms.

RESULTS

We observed leading comorbid diseases were hypertension (25.9%), diabetes (21.1%), heart diseases (9.3%), and asthma (8.7%). The most frequently reported adverse events were injection site pain (34.3%), fever (32.6%), headache (20.2%), fatigue (16.6%), and cold feeling (15.4%). The chances of having adverse events were significantly higher in males than females (p = 0.039). However, 36.4% of respondents reported no adverse events. Adverse events usually appeared after 12 h and went way within 48 h of vaccination. Besides, 85.5% were happy with the overall vaccination management, while 88.0% of the respondents recommended the COVID-19 vaccine for others for early immunization.

CONCLUSION

According to the present findings, reported adverse events after the doses of Covishield in Bangladesh were non-serious and temporary. In Bangladesh, the early vaccination against COVID-19 was possible due to its prudent vaccine deal, previous mass vaccination experience, and vaccine diplomacy.

Sociodemographic Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy, Fear of Infection, and Protection Self-Efficacy

OBJECTIVES

Arkansas COVID-19 vaccine uptake has been lower than the national average. This study examined associations between sociodemographic factors and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, fear of infection, and protection self-efficacy.

METHODS

Adults either residing, having employment, or receiving health care in Arkansas (n = 754) participated in an online survey between October 30, 2020 and January 16, 2021. Participants were recruited in both rural and urban areas from 6 Arkansas primary care clinics. Survey questions addressed sociodemographic factors, COVID-19 infection fear, protection self-efficacy, and COVID-19 vaccine attitudes. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess associations between dependent variables and respondents' sociodemographic characteristics, COVID-19 infection fear, and COVID-19 protection self-efficacy.

RESULTS

About 38% of participants reported COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Age, sex, race, and education were significantly associated with COVID-19 and general vaccine attitudes. Odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy decreased as age increased (OR = 0.98; P < .01). Women had higher odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy than men (OR = 1.52; P < .05). Respondents with a high school diploma and below and respondents with some college or a technical degree had greater odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (OR = 2.58; P < .001; and OR = 1.97; P < .01, respectively) compared to respondents with a 4-year college degree. Black/African American respondents had greater odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy compared to White respondents (OR = 3.08; P < .001). No significant difference was observed among rural and urban respondents regarding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy; however, respondents in rural areas were more likely to report low general vaccine trust compared to those in urban areas (OR = 1.87; P < .01). Respondents reporting no fear (OR = 5.51; P < .001) and very little fear (OR = 1.95; P < .05) of COVID-19 had greater odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy compared to respondents who feared COVID-19 infection to a great extent.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and general trust in vaccines differ significantly among age, sex, race, and education. These trust and hesitancy patterns are challenges for achieving population immunity and follow similar patterns of vulnerability to COVID-19. Vaccination programs and interventions must consider these differences in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and general vaccine trust to alleviate COVID-19 disparities. Findings make a significant contribution in evaluating vaccine hesitancy among a large, diverse sample from a rural state.