Children are the key to the Endgame: A case for routine pediatric COVID vaccination

Parents' Willingness to Vaccinate Their Children Aged From 6 Months to Under 5 Years With COVID-19 Vaccines

Despite strides in vaccinating priority groups against COVID-19, children under 5 years in Vietnam are still under-immunized, emphasizing a significant gap in prioritization. This study aimed to assess parental willingness to vaccinate children aged 6 months to under 5 years against COVID-19 in Vietnam and identify influential factors affecting this willingness. Data were collected via a survey of 5960 parents/guardians between May and June 2022. Multinomial logistic regression was employed to analyze the impact of various factors on parents' willingness to vaccinate their children, alongside investigating reasons for reluctance or refusal and preferences for vaccine origins. Approximately 50.5%, 30.2%, and 19.3% of parents were willing, hesitant, and unwilling to vaccinate their children, respectively. Primary reasons for reluctance included concerns about vaccine safety, efficacy, and the severity of the pandemic. The most preferred vaccines originated in the United States. Factors significantly influencing willingness included parents' age, knowledge of COVID-19 and vaccines, residency, education, perception of information sufficiency, children's comorbidities, and family members' vaccination status. Promoting child vaccination habits can boost COVID-19 immunization rates. Targeting hesitancy among parents of children with comorbidities is crucial. Enhancing parental knowledge and leveraging fully vaccinated family members are effective strategies.

Impact of household decision makers' hesitancy to vaccinate children against COVID-19 on other household members: A family-based study in Taizhou, China

Background

Vaccination is the most effective means of preventing outbreaks of infectious diseases, and family ;decision makers play an important role in decision-making regarding family matters and may influence other family members to take an active role in vaccinating children against COVID-19.

Purpose

This study examined the influence of family decision makers on the hesitation of other family members to vaccinate their children against COVID-19.

Methods

A population-based, self-administered online questionnaire was administered in Taizhou, China, from September 1, 2021, to September 15, 2021. The questionnaire included demographic information, knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions about the COVID-19 vaccine as well as hesitation regarding the use of the COVID-19 vaccination in children. In total, 490 respondents were included in this study. Logistic regression was used to assess the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy.

Results

In total, 490 respondents from 190 households were interviewed. Of the 190 family decision makers, 43.7% (83/190) were hesitant to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. When family decision makers were hesitant to vaccinate children against COVID-19, 65.1% (82/126) of the other family members expressed similar hesitancy regarding vaccination. When family decision makers were not hesitant to vaccinate children, only 21.3% (37/174) of other family members were hesitant to do so. In the regression analysis, family decision makers' hesitation to vaccinate their children was associated with other family members' hesitation (OR=6.264, 95% CI:3.132-12.526). In addition, decision makers' perceptions of the safety of the vaccine (OR=0.422, 95% CI:0.215-0.826) and hesitation to vaccinate themselves (OR=8.967, 95% CI:4.745-16.948) influenced their hesitation to vaccinate their children.

Conclusion

The present study found that family decision makers' hesitation to vaccinate children against COVID-19 influenced other family members' hesitation to vaccinate children. In addition, family decision makers' perceptions of the safety of the vaccine and their hesitation to vaccinate themselves influenced other family members' hesitation to vaccinate their children.

Different Safety Pattern of an Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine (CoronaVac®) According to Age Group in a Pediatric Population from 3 to 17 Years Old, in an Open-Label Study in Chile

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of vaccinating children against SARS-CoV-2 was rapidly established. This study describes the safety of CoronaVac® in children and adolescents between 3- and 17-years-old in a multicenter study in Chile with two vaccine doses in a 4-week interval. For all participants, immediate adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and AEs of special interest (AESIs) were registered throughout the study. In the safety subgroup, AEs were recorded 28 days after each dose. COVID-19 surveillance was performed throughout the study. A total of 1139 individuals received the first and 1102 the second dose of CoronaVac®; 835 were in the safety subgroup. The first dose showed the highest number of AEs: up to 22.2% of participants reported any local and 17.1% systemic AE. AEs were more frequent in adolescents after the first dose, were transient, and mainly mild. Pain at the inoculation site was the most frequent AE for all ages. Fever was the most frequent systemic AE for 3-5 years old and headache in 6-17 years old. No SAEs or AESIs related to vaccination occurred. Most of the COVID-19 cases were mild and managed as outpatients. CoronaVac® was safe and well tolerated in children and adolescents, with different safety patterns according to age.

COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Immigrant, Refugee, and Nonimmigrant Children and Adolescents in Ontario, Canada

Importance

COVID-19 vaccinations are recommended for minors. Surveys indicate lower vaccine acceptance by some immigrant and refugee groups.

Objective

To identify characteristics in immigrant, refugee, and nonimmigrant minors associated with vaccination.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used linked, population-based demographic and health care data from Ontario, Canada, including all children aged 4 to 17 years registered for universal health insurance on January 1, 2021, across 2 distinct campaigns: for adolescents (ages 12-17 years), starting May 23, 2021, and for children (ages 5-11 years), starting November 25, 2021, through April 24, 2022. Data were analyzed from May 9 to August 2, 2022.

Exposures

Immigrant or refugee status and immigration characteristics (recency, category, region of origin, and generation).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes of interest were crude rates of COVID-19 vaccination (defined as ≥1 vaccination for children and ≥2 vaccinations for adolescents) and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CIs for vaccination, adjusted for clinical, sociodemographic, and health system factors.

Results

The total cohort included 2.2 million children and adolescents, with 1 098 749 children (mean [SD] age, 7.06 [2.00] years; 563 388 [51.3%] males) and 1 142 429 adolescents (mean [SD] age, 14.00 [1.99] years; 586 617 [51.3%] males). Among children, 53 090 (4.8%) were first-generation and 256 886 (23.4%) were second-generation immigrants or refugees; among adolescents, 104 975 (9.2%) were first-generation and 221 981 (19.4%) were second-generation immigrants or refugees, most being economic or family-class immigrants. Immigrants, particularly refugees, were more likely to live in neighborhoods with highest material deprivation (first-generation immigrants: 18.6% of children and 20.2% of adolescents; first-generation refugees: 46.4% of children and 46.3% of adolescents; nonimmigrants: 18.5% of children and 17.2% of adolescents) and COVID-19 risk (first-generation immigrants; 20.0% of children and 20.5% of adolescents; first-generation refugees: 9.4% of children and 12.6% of adolescents; nonimmigrants: 6.9% of children and 6.8% of adolescents). Vaccination rates (53.1% in children and 79.2% in adolescents) were negatively associated with material deprivation. In both age groups, odds for vaccination were higher in immigrants (children: aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.27-1.33; adolescents: aOR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.08-1.12) but lower in refugees (children: aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.33-0.36; adolescents: aOR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.84-0.91) compared with nonimmigrants. In immigrant- and refugee-only models stratified by generation, region of origin was associated with uptake, compared with the overall rate, with the lowest odds observed in immigrants and refugees from Eastern Europe (children: aOR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.35-0.46; adolescents: aOR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.38-0.43) and Central Africa (children: aOR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.16-0.35; adolescents: aOR, 0.51,CI: 0.45-0.59) and the highest odds observed in immigrants and refugees from Southeast Asia (children: aOR, 2.68; 95% CI, 2.47-2.92; adolescents aOR, 4.42; 95% CI, 4.10-4.77). Adjusted odds of vaccination among immigrants and refugees from regions with lowest vaccine coverage were similar across generations.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study using a population-based sample in Canada, nonrefugee immigrants had higher vaccine coverage than nonimmigrants. Substantial heterogeneity by region of origin and lower vaccination coverage in refugees persisted across generations. These findings suggest that vaccine campaigns need precision public health approaches targeting specific barriers in identified, undervaccinated subgroups.

Targeted Vaccine Messaging to Promote COVID-19 Vaccines for Children and Youth

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of distinct message types in promoting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination intentions for parents of children and adolescents.

METHODS

We collected data through the Voices of Child Health in Chicago Parent Panel Survey from October to November 2021. Parents were randomly assigned to read 1 of 4 vaccine message types and then report their intentions to vaccinate each COVID-19-unvaccinated child (0-17 years) in their household (n= 1453).

RESULTS

The sample included 898 parents. Compared with a control group (37.5%), the proportion of parents who were very likely to vaccinate their children was higher when messages highlighted that other trusted parents have vaccinated their children (53.3%) or that the vaccine is safe and thoroughly tested (48.9%) but not when messages highlighted that the vaccine is well-tolerated (41.5%). After adjusting for parent and child characteristics, the odds of being very likely to vaccinate remained higher in the trusted parents group but not in the safe/thoroughly tested group. Unlike the control and well-tolerated groups, there were no racial/ethnic disparities in the unadjusted proportion of parents who were very likely to vaccinate in the trusted parents and safe/thoroughly tested groups. Message types affected the unadjusted proportion of COVID-19-unvaccinated parents who were very likely to vaccinate their children.

CONCLUSIONS

Messages that focus on trusted parents choosing to vaccinate their children were more effective at promoting parents' COVID-19 vaccination intentions for their children than alternative messages. These findings have implications for public health messaging and pediatric providers' communications with parents.

What are the key pediatric public policy priorities as the COVID-19 pandemic persists?

IMPACT

The COVID-19 pandemic is not over, and its impact is just beginning to be felt on children. COVID-19 vaccines protect both the pregnant patient and newborns, and breastfeeding provides a key component of passive protective immunity. "Long COVID" has contributed to the current crisis in pediatric mental health, and vaccines confer protection against this long-term complication of COVID-19 disease. Vaccine misinformation is not only impacting compliance with maternal and pediatric COVID-19 immunization efforts, but also other routine childhood vaccinations. As a public health priority, we must improve our response to vaccine misinformation and find novel strategies to improve vaccine compliance.

Political Partisanship and Trust in Government Predict Popular Support for COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates for Various Professions and Demographic Groups: A Research Note

Due to the slow rate of COVID-19 vaccine uptake and the spread of the highly contagious Omicron variant, governments are considering mandating COVID-19 vaccination for specific professions and demographic groups. This study evaluates popular attitudes toward such policies. We fielded a survey of 535 registered voters in South Dakota to examine popular attitudes towards vaccine mandates for five groups-children 12 and older, K-12 teachers, medical staff, nursing homes staff, and police personnel. We estimated a series of logistic regression models and presented predicted probabilities to find the primary determinants of these attitudes. Results revealed that political partisanship and trust in government are strong predictors of support for vaccine mandates across all models. Should government and public health officials wish to increase the proportion of people vaccinated for COVID-19, they must recognize the limitations of current public health campaigns, and reshape their efforts in congruence with scientific findings.

Six-month multidisciplinary follow-up in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: An Italian single-center experience

Background

A severe multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) related to SARS-CoV-2 has been described after infection. A limited number of reports have analyzed the long-term complications related to pro-inflammatory status in MIS-C. We evaluated multiorgan impairment at the 6-month follow-up in MIS-C.

Methods

We enrolled 33 pediatric patients consecutively hospitalized for MIS-C and monitored for almost 6 months. The inter-relationship of patient's features and disease severity at admission with long term complications was studied by multivariate analysis.

Results

Endo-metabolic derangement, cardiac injury, respiratory, renal and gastrointestinal manifestations and neurological involvement are part of the initial presentation. The most abnormalities appear to resolve within the first few weeks, without significant long term dysfunction at the 6-months follow-up, except for endocrine (non-thyroidal illness syndrome in 12.1%, insulin resistance in 21.2%) and neurological system (27.3% cognitive or psychological, behavioral, adaptive difficulties). Endocrine and heart involvement at admission represent a significant factor on the long term sequelae; however no association between severity score and long-term outcome was noted.

Conclusions

The severity of initial clinical presentation may be associated to organ domain, however it is not related to long term sequelae. The prevalent organ restoration supports a predominant indirect immune-mediated injury triggered by a systemic inflammatory response; however a direct damage due to the viral entry could be not excluded. Eventhought our preliminary results seem to suggest that MIS-C is not a long-term risk condition for children health, a longer follow-up is mandatory to confirm this hypothesis.

Comparison of the Onset and End of Specific and Major Side Effects in Iranian Teenage Participants Vaccinated With COVID-19 Vaccine: Sinopharm and Soberana

Background

Clinical trials were conducted on children on side effects after vaccination. We tried to assess the frequency and onset of the main symptoms in children who were vaccinated. We aimed to evaluate early and delayed adverse effects after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine among Iranian pediatrics and adolescents in a national survey.

Methods

This cross-sectional study included people <18 years who received the Soberana (PastoCoVac) and Sinopharm vaccines since 2021. The basic information was gender, age, type of vaccine, and reaction after vaccination besides the main events that occurred for them. The required data were collected via a predetermined checklist by trained interviewers through phone calls by their parents or legal guardians. The independent t test and Fisher exact test were used. P values less than 0.05 were considered significant.

Results

A total of 11,042 participants (age range, 10-18 years) consisting of 5374 boys (47.8%) and 5768 girls (52.2%) were studied and 88.1% of the children (n = 9727) were vaccinated by Sinopharm and 11.9% (n = 1315) by Soberana. The data of kidney-related side effects had delayed improvement of side effects after the Sinopharm compared with the Soberana vaccines (P = 0.012). Cardiovascular and hematological side effects showed early-onset (P = 0.006) and delayed improvement of side effects (P = 0.002) after the Soberana vaccine compared with the Sinopharm vaccine. Neurological side effects showed delayed improvement of side effects after the Soberana vaccine compared with the Sinopharm vaccine (P = 0.027). Joint-related side effects showed early-onset (P = 0.004) and delayed improvement of side effects (P = 0.023) after the Soberana vaccine compared with the Sinopharm vaccine. Respiratory side effects showed delayed improvement of side effects after the Soberana vaccine compared with the Sinopharm vaccine (P = 0.013), and dermatological side effects showed early-onset (P = 0.050) and delayed improvement of side effects (P = 0.035) after the Soberana vaccine compared with the Sinopharm vaccine. There was not any statistically significant difference regarding gastrointestinal side effects between the 2 vaccines (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The cardiovascular and hematological, joint-related (non-neurologic musculoskeletal) and dermatological side effects after the Soberana vaccine appear earlier and end later compared with the Sinopharm vaccine. Improvement of renal side effects in the Sinopharm vaccine group and improvement of neurological and respiratory side effects in the Soberana vaccine group occurred with delay compared with other vaccines.

Barriers to and solutions for representative inclusion across the lifespan and in life course research: The need for structural competency highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic

Exclusion of special populations (older adults; pregnant women, children, and adolescents; individuals of lower socioeconomic status and/or who live in rural communities; people from racial and ethnic minority groups; individuals from sexual or gender minority groups; and individuals with disabilities) in research is a pervasive problem, despite efforts and policy changes by the National Institutes of Health and other organizations. These populations are adversely impacted by social determinants of health (SDOH) that reduce access and ability to participate in biomedical research. In March 2020, the Northwestern University Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute hosted the "Lifespan and Life Course Research: integrating strategies" "Un-Meeting" to discuss barriers and solutions to underrepresentation of special populations in biomedical research. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted how exclusion of representative populations in research can increase health inequities. We applied findings of this meeting to perform a literature review of barriers and solutions to recruitment and retention of representative populations in research and to discuss how findings are important to research conducted during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We highlight the role of SDOH, review barriers and solutions to underrepresentation, and discuss the importance of a structural competency framework to improve research participation and retention among special populations.

Combining predictive models with future change scenarios can produce credible forecasts of COVID-19 futures

The advent and distribution of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in late 2020 was thought to represent an effective means to control the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. This optimistic expectation was dashed by the omicron waves that emerged over the winter of 2021/2020 even in countries that had managed to vaccinate a large fraction of their populations, raising questions about whether it is possible to use scientific knowledge along with predictive models to anticipate changes and design management measures for the pandemic. Here, we used an extended SEIR model for SARS-CoV-2 transmission sequentially calibrated to data on cases and interventions implemented in Florida until Sept. 24th 2021, and coupled to scenarios of plausible changes in key drivers of viral transmission, to evaluate the capacity of such a tool for exploring the future of the pandemic in the state. We show that while the introduction of vaccinations could have led to the permanent, albeit drawn-out, ending of the pandemic if immunity acts over the long-term, additional futures marked by complicated repeat waves of infection become possible if this immunity wanes over time. We demonstrate that the most recent omicron wave could have been predicted by this hybrid system, but only if timely information on the timing of variant emergence and its epidemiological features were made available. Simulations for the introduction of a new variant exhibiting higher transmissibility than omicron indicated that while this will result in repeat waves, forecasted peaks are unlikely to reach that observed for the omicron wave owing to levels of immunity established over time in the population. These results highlight that while limitations of models calibrated to past data for precisely forecasting the futures of epidemics must be recognized, insightful predictions of pandemic futures are still possible if uncertainties about changes in key drivers are captured appropriately through plausible scenarios.

Do we need to vaccinate every child against COVID-19: What evidence suggests-A systematic review of opinions

It is still debatable whether all children should receive the COVID-19 vaccine. The comparatively mild cases and low risk of COVID-19 in children compared to adults, as well as the lack of clarity on the relative effects of the disease and vaccine, indicate that the risk-benefit ratio of vaccination in children is more nuanced. To consider and highlight the complexity of policy decisions regarding COVID-19 vaccination in children, we outlined the points regarding for and against vaccination of children against COVID-19 in this systemic review. Using Medical Search Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords, we searched PubMed, PubMed Central, Scopus, and Google Scholar. The primary search term was COVID-19 vaccination (all synonyms), factors (all synonyms), and among children (all synonyms). A total of 367 articles were searched. Finally, 64 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The major theme/tone of 28 (43.75%) articles was in favor of children's COVID vaccination, and they were highlighting the positive factors, whereas the major theme/tone of 20 (31.25%) articles was against it. Approximately 16 (25.0%) articles were in a neutral position. Major factors highlighted by articles in favor of childhood COVID vaccination were as follows: the increasing rate of disease burden (29 articles), prevention of interruption of academic activities of children or school reopening (24 articles), and a role in defense against COVID infection (21 articles). Major factors against childhood vaccination were as follows: mild infection among children (27 articles), ethical concerns and legal problems regarding the consent of minors (17 articles), and vaccine hesitancy among parents for childhood vaccination (11 articles). Whereas, factors of uncertainty were the role in the reduction of community transmission (19 articles), protection against MIS-C (10 articles), and defense against long COVID (7 articles). Considering all the factors of COVID-19 disease progression among children, a cautious approach will be essential before proceeding with COVID-19 vaccination in children.

A systematic review of current status and challenges of vaccinating children against SARS-CoV-2

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has inflicted immense damage to countries, economies and societies worldwide. Authorized COVID-19 vaccines based on different platforms have been widely inoculated in adults, showing up to 100% immunogenicity with significant efficacy in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections and the occurrence of severe COVID-19. It has also greatly slowed the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants, as shown in clinical trials and real-world evidence. However, the total dosage of COVID-19 vaccines for children is much smaller than that for adults due to limitations from parental concern of vaccine safety, presenting a potential obstacle in ending the COVID-19 pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 not only increases the risk of severe multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) in children, but also negatively affects children's psychology and academics, indirectly hindering the maintenance and progress of normal social order. Therefore, this article examines the clinical manifestations of children infected with SARS-CoV-2, the status of vaccination against COVID-19 in children, vaccination-related adverse events, and the unique immune mechanisms of children. In particular, the necessity and challenges of vaccinating children against SARS-CoV-2 were highlighted from the perspectives of society and family. In summary, parental hesitancy is unnecessary as adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination have been proven to be infrequent, comprise of mild symptoms, and have a good prognosis.

Parental health beliefs, intention, and strategies about covid-19 vaccine for their children: A cross-sectional analysis from five Arab countries in the Middle East

BACKGROUND

The issue around vaccination of children has brought divergent opinions among the populations across the globe and among the Arab population. There has been a low response rate to the calls for vaccination of children and this is reflective of the sentiments which parents may have towards their children being vaccinated. This study aims to explore the parents' health beliefs, intentions, and strategies towards the COVID-19 vaccine for their children among Arab population.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study using an online survey from October to December 2021, was carried out in five Arab countries in the Middle East. A reliable health belief model (HBM) including five domains: severity, susceptibility, benefits, barriers and cues to action, was adopted. Chi-square, Mann-Whitney test, and multivariable logistic regression were performed for data analysis.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 58 % (1154/2000). Only 56 % of Arab parents are intended to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. The mean scores of parental health belief are largely driven by their concern over the vaccine's side effect (p = 0.001) followed by its efficacy, safety (p < 0.001), and scheduling difficulty (p = 0.029). However, strategies that were statistically encouraged parents to vaccinate their children included doctor's recommendation, adequate information being provided, and acceptance of the vaccine by public (p < 0.001). Parents with one child were almost three times most likely to vaccinate their children (OR = 2.660, 95 %CI = 1.572-4.504, p < 0.001). Parents' desire to vaccinate their children is also influenced by other factors such as job loss owing to COVID-19 and the presence of a health worker in the family.

CONCLUSION

Intention of Arab parents to vaccinate their children via COVID-19 vaccine is still limited. Thus, it is essential for health care authorities to avail the information which will debunk the erroneous beliefs which some parents have developed towards the vaccination of children against COVID-19.

Immunologic response, Efficacy, and Safety of Vaccines against COVID-19 Infection in Healthy and immunosuppressed Children and Adolescents Aged 2 - 21 years old: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Children and adolescents form a large proportion of societies and play an important role in the transmission of COVID-19. On the other hand, their education, mental and physical wellness, and safety are compromised which makes vaccination a crucial step to return to normal life. In the current systematic review, the COVID-19 vaccination was evaluated in a total of 50,148 children and adolescents in 22 published studies and 5,279 participants in two ongoing clinical trials. The study was registered in the PROSPERO with the ID# CRD42022303615. Data were collected about multiple vaccines including BNT162b2 (Pfizer), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), JNJ-78436735 (Johnson and Johnson), CoronaVac (Sinovac), BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm), adenovirus type-5-vectored vaccine, ZyCov-D, and BBV152 (COVAXIN). The immune response and efficacy of such vaccines were 96% - 100% in healthy children and adolescents and were also acceptable in those with underlying diseases and suppressed immune systems. The current systematic review revealed favorable safety profiles of employed vaccines in children and adolescents; however, adverse reactions such as myocarditis and myopericarditis were reported which were transient and resolved entirely. Consequently, vaccinating children and adolescents aged 2 - 21 years old is beneficial to abort the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, the risk-benefit assessments revealed favorable results for vaccinating children and adolescents, especially those with underlying diseases and immunosuppressed conditions, alongside adults to prevent transmission, severe infection, negative outcomes, and new variants formation. Also, according to the meta-analysis, the efficacy and immune response of vaccines after the first and second doses were 91% and 92%, respectively. Meanwhile, overall immune response for all vaccines was 95% and 91% for Pfizer vaccine.

The impact of COVID-19 on disease epidemiology, family dynamics, and social justice in Minnesota: All that you cannot see

Objective

The COVID-19 pandemic presented a challenge to established seed grant funding mechanisms aimed at fostering collaboration in child health research between investigators at the University of Minnesota (UMN) and Children's Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota (Children's MN). We created a "rapid response," small grant program to catalyze collaborations in child health COVID-19 research. In this paper, we describe the projects funded by this mechanism and metrics of their success.

Methods

Using seed funds from the UMN Clinical and Translational Science Institute, the UMN Medical School Department of Pediatrics, and the Children's Minnesota Research Institute, a rapid response request for applications (RFAs) was issued based on the stipulations that the proposal had to: 1) consist of a clear, synergistic partnership between co-PIs from the academic and community settings; and 2) that the proposal addressed an area of knowledge deficit relevant to child health engendered by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

Grant applications submitted in response to this RFA segregated into three categories: family fragility and disruption exacerbated by COVID-19; knowledge gaps about COVID-19 disease in children; and optimizing pediatric care in the setting of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. A series of virtual workshops presented research results to the pediatric community. Several manuscripts and extramural funding awards underscored the success of the program.

Conclusions

A "rapid response" seed funding mechanism enabled nascent academic-community research partnerships during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the context of the rapidly evolving landscape of COVID-19, flexible seed grant programs can be useful in addressing unmet needs in pediatric health.

The Mediating Role of the Perceived COVID-19 Vaccine Benefits: Examining Israeli Parents' Perceptions Regarding Their Adolescents' Vaccination

Israel was among the first countries to initiate adolescent COVID-19 vaccination. As adolescent vaccination requires parental consent, we evaluated the factors associated with parents’ willingness to vaccinate their adolescents and their point of view regarding adolescents’ involvement in this decision. An online survey was completed by 581 parents of adolescents aged 16–18. The main independent variables included trust in the healthcare system, components of the Health Belief Model (HBM) and adolescents’ involvement in the decision, as well as background data, including demographics. Analysis included a multiple logistic regression and mediation examination. Parents reported that 446 adolescents (76.8%) have been or will soon be vaccinated against COVID-19, 12.2% chose not to vaccinate their child and 11% have not yet decided. Vaccination was significantly associated with HBM components and with adolescents’ involvement in the decision. The perceived vaccination benefits acted as a mediator in the association between parents’ COVID-19 perceived threat and adolescent vaccination, as well as between parents’ trust in the healthcare system and adolescent vaccination. Addressing vaccination benefits and barriers is pivotal in the attempt to enhance adolescents’ vaccination adherence. Considering the importance of adolescents’ involvement in the decision, addressing them directly may also be beneficial in improving vaccination rates.

A Comprehensive Investigation Regarding the Differentiation of the Procurable COVID-19 Vaccines

COVID-19 caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 became a serious threat to humankind for the past couple of years. The development of vaccine and its immediate application might be the only to escape from the grasp of this demoniac pandemic. Approximately 343 clinical trials on COVID-19 vaccines are ongoing currently, and almost all countries are motivating ongoing researches at warp speed for the development of vaccines against COVID-19. This review explores the progress in the development of the vaccines, their current status of ongoing clinical research, mechanisms, and regulatory approvals. Many pharmaceutical companies are already in the endgame for manufacturing various vaccines of which some are already being marketed across the globe, while others are yet to get approval for marketing. The primary aim of this review is to compare regulatory accepted vaccines in terms of their composition, doses, regulatory status, and efficacy. The study is conducted by grouping into approved and unapproved vaccines for marketing. Different routes of administration of vaccines along with the efficacy of the routes are also presented in the review. A wide range of database and clinical trial data is reviewed for sorting out the information on different vaccines. Unfortunately, many mutations (alpha, beta, gamma, delta, kappa, omicron etc.) of SARS-CoV-2 have attacked people in very short time, which is the great challenge for investigational vaccines. Moreover, some vaccines like Pfizer's BNT162, Oxford's ChAdOx1, Moderna's mRNA-1273, and Bharat Biotech's Covaxin have got regulatory approval in some countries for its distribution which may prove to stand tall against the pandemic.

Efficacy, Immunogenicity and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

There is a significant research gap in meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. This study analyzed the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines. Published phase I, phase II, and phase III trials analyzing safety and immunogenicity and phase III randomized clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines were included. We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, and The Lancet for published articles evaluating the relative reduction in COVID-19 risk after vaccination. Selected literatures were published between December 15, 2019 and May 15, 2021 on the safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines. This meta-analysis included studies that confirmed cases of COVID-19 using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. This study detected 8,926 eligible research articles published on COVID-19 vaccines. Of these, 25 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among the selected articles, 19 randomized clinical trials, 2 non-randomized clinical trials, and 3 observational studies were analyzed. Seven (28%) studies were included in the meta-analysis. The efficacy of the adenovirus vector vaccine was 73% (95% CI = 69–77) and that of the messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was 85% (95% CI = 82–88) in participants aged ≥18 years. There are no reports of clinical trials in participants aged under 16 years. The production of neutralizing antibodies against receptor-binding domains (RBDs) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in >90% of the vaccinated samples was reported within 0–30 days of the first or the second dose of the vaccine. Pain at the injection site was the most common local symptom in people receiving mRNA vaccines (29%–85% of participants). Fever (0.2%–95%) was the most prevalent in people receiving adenovirus vector vaccines, and fatigue (8.4%–55%) was the most common side effect in people receiving the mRNA vaccines. Studies suggest that mRNA vaccines and adenovirus vector vaccines can provide moderate to high protection against COVID-19 infection in people over 18 years. Evidence of the long-term protection of the vaccines in people aged under 16 years against the multiple variants of COVID-19 are limited. This study will provide an integrated evaluation on the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of the COVID-19 vaccines.

BNT162b2 Vaccination during Pregnancy Protects Both the Mother and Infant: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S Antibodies Persistently Positive in an Infant at 6 Months of Age

Vaccinations are the most important intervention for controlling the ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. BNT162b2 is an mRNA-based vaccine, which is promising and safe for use during pregnancy, as it could help prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and its complications during pregnancy. Other vaccines, such as influenza and Tdap (tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis) vaccines, provide significant protection for babies. Recent studies have shown that COVID-19 antibodies are present in newborns at birth, owing to maternal BNT162b2 vaccination during pregnancy; however, it is currently unclear how long these antibodies could protect infants from SARS-CoV-2 infection and its complications. Herein, we present the case of a preterm baby born at 33 weeks via an emergency cesarean section owing to maternal complications. The mother had received two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine at 22 and 26 weeks of gestation. Positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 S antibodies were detected in the infant at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months of age. This is the first case report in which BNT162b2 vaccination during pregnancy yielded a persistent immune response in an infant at 6 months of age. The declining anti-SARS-CoV-2 S antibody titers noted at 6 months of age emphasize the need for the vaccination of children at this age.

The Relationship Between the COVID-19 Pandemic and Vaccine Hesitancy: A Scoping Review of Literature Until August 2021

Background: Vaccines have been contributing to eradicate or drastically reduce the incidence of common diseases. Simultaneously, vaccine hesitancy is considered among the top ten global health threats. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a tremendous impact on health, economics, and society worldwide, while also reinforcing faulty beliefs about the necessity of vaccine programs as a whole. This study aims to synthesise evidence on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on vaccine hesitancy.

Methods: A scoping review of literature between 1 January 2020 and 1 August 2021 was performed.

Results: COVID-19 vaccine acceptance decreased from more than 70 to <50% in 8 months starting from January 2020. Healthcare professionals demonstrate higher rates of vaccine receptivity than the public, which was more influenced by (social) media. The circulation of misinformation was associated with increased fear of side effects related to COVID-19 vaccines. Regarding other vaccines coverage, parents' intentions to vaccinate their children against influenza increased 15.8% during the COVID-19 pandemic so far. Nonetheless, the number of vaccines administered decreased, influenced by factors like fear of being exposed to the virus at healthcare facilities and restrictions.

Conclusions: Several efforts should be undertaken to improve vaccine acceptance and coverage now and beyond the pandemic to optimal population protection.