The scientific and ethical feasibility of immunity passports

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 passes and mandates on disease transmission, vaccination intention, and uptake: a scoping review

PURPOSE

Policymakers have struggled to maintain SARS-CoV-2 transmission at levels that are manageable to contain the COVID-19 disease burden while enabling a maximum of societal and economic activities. One of the tools that have been used to facilitate this is the so-called "COVID-19 pass". We aimed to document current evidence on the effectiveness of COVID-19 passes, distinguishing their indirect effects by improving vaccination intention and uptake from their direct effects on COVID-19 transmission measured by the incidence of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review on the scientific literature of the proposed topic covering the period January 2021 to September 2022, in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for scoping reviews.

RESULTS

Out of a yield of 4,693 publications, 45 studies from multiple countries were retained for full-text review. The results suggest that implementing COVID-19 passes tends to reduce the incidence of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths due to COVID-19. The use of COVID-19 passes was also shown to improve overall vaccination uptake and intention, but not in people who hold strong anti-COVID-19 vaccine beliefs.

CONCLUSION

The evidence from the literature we reviewed tends to indicate positive direct and indirect effects from the use of COVID-19 passes. A major limitation to establishing this firmly is the entanglement of individual effects of multiple measures being implemented simultaneously.

Ethical considerations of the vaccine development process and vaccination: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Various vaccines have been developed and distributed worldwide to control and cope with COVID-19 disease. To ensure vaccines benefit the global community, the ethical principles of beneficence, justice, non-maleficence, and autonomy should be examined and adhered to in the process of development, distribution, and implementation. This study, therefore, aimed to examine ethical considerations of vaccine development and vaccination processes.

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature was conducted based on the Arkesy and O'Malley protocol to identify eligible studies published until November 2021. We searched Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and SciELO databases. The search was conducted using combinations of Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) search terms and keywords for Ethics, COVID-19, and vaccines in abstract, keywords, and title fields to retrieve potentially relevant publications. We included any study that reported one of the four principles of medical ethics: autonomy, justice, non-maleficence, and beneficence in the COVID-19 vaccine development and distribution and implementation of vaccinations. Letters, notes, protocols, and brief communications were excluded. In addition, we searched gray literature to include relevant studies (ProQuest database, conferences, and reports). Data were analyzed using framework analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 43 studies were included. Ethical considerations concluded two themes: (1) production and (2) distribution and vaccination. The production process consisted of 16 codes and 4 main Categories, distribution and vaccination process consisted of 12 codes and 4 main Categories. Moreover, the ethical considerations of special groups were divided into four main groups: health care workers (HCWs) (five codes), children and adolescents (five codes), the elderly (one code), and ethnic and racial minorities (three codes).

CONCLUSION

Due to the externalities of pandemics and the public and social benefits and harms of vaccination, it is not feasible to adhere to all four principles of medical ethics simultaneously and perfectly. This issue confronts individuals and policymakers with several moral dilemmas. It seems that decision-making based on the balance between social benefit and social harm is a better criterion in this regard, and the final decision should be made based on maximizing the public benefit and minimizing the public harm.

Vaccine Passports and Political Legitimacy: A Public Reason Framework for Policymakers

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to evolve, taking its toll on people's lives around the world, vaccine passports remain a contentious topic of debate in most liberal democracies. While a small literature on vaccine passports has sprung up over the past few years that considers their ethical pros and cons, in this paper we focus on the question of when vaccine passports are politically legitimate. Specifically, we put forward a 'public reason ethics framework' for resolving ethical disputes and use the case of vaccine passports to demonstrate how it works. The framework walks users through a structured analysis of a vaccine passport proposal to determine whether the proposal can be publicly justified and is therefore legitimate. Use of this framework may also help policymakers to design more effective vaccine passports, by incorporating structured input from the public, and thereby better taking the public's interests and values into account. In short, a public reason ethics framework is meant to encourage better, more legitimate decision-making, resulting in policies that are ethically justifiable, legitimate and effective.

What Makes a Quality Health App-Developing a Global Research-Based Health App Quality Assessment Framework for CEN-ISO/TS 82304-2: Delphi Study

BACKGROUND

The lack of an international standard for assessing and communicating health app quality and the lack of consensus about what makes a high-quality health app negatively affect the uptake of such apps. At the request of the European Commission, the international Standard Development Organizations (SDOs), European Committee for Standardization, International Organization for Standardization, and International Electrotechnical Commission have joined forces to develop a technical specification (TS) for assessing the quality and reliability of health and wellness apps.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to create a useful, globally applicable, trustworthy, and usable framework to assess health app quality.

METHODS

A 2-round Delphi technique with 83 experts from 6 continents (predominantly Europe) participating in one (n=42, 51%) or both (n=41, 49%) rounds was used to achieve consensus on a framework for assessing health app quality. Aims included identifying the maximum 100 requirement questions for the uptake of apps that do or do not qualify as medical devices. The draft assessment framework was built on 26 existing frameworks, the principles of stringent legislation, and input from 20 core experts. A follow-up survey with 28 respondents informed a scoring mechanism for the questions. After subsequent alignment with related standards, the quality assessment framework was tested and fine-tuned with manufacturers of 11 COVID-19 symptom apps. National mirror committees from the 52 countries that participated in the SDO technical committees were invited to comment on 4 working drafts and subsequently vote on the TS.

RESULTS

The final quality assessment framework includes 81 questions, 67 (83%) of which impact the scores of 4 overarching quality aspects. After testing with people with low health literacy, these aspects were phrased as "Healthy and safe," "Easy to use," "Secure data," and "Robust build." The scoring mechanism enables communication of the quality assessment results in a health app quality score and label, alongside a detailed report. Unstructured interviews with stakeholders revealed that evidence and third-party assessment are needed for health app uptake. The manufacturers considered the time needed to complete the assessment and gather evidence (2-4 days) acceptable. Publication of CEN-ISO/TS 82304-2:2021 Health software - Part 2: Health and wellness apps - Quality and reliability was approved in May 2021 in a nearly unanimous vote by 34 national SDOs, including 6 of the 10 most populous countries worldwide.

CONCLUSIONS

A useful and usable international standard for health app quality assessment was developed. Its quality, approval rate, and early use provide proof of its potential to become the trusted, commonly used global framework. The framework will help manufacturers enhance and efficiently demonstrate the quality of health apps, consumers, and health care professionals to make informed decisions on health apps. It will also help insurers to make reimbursement decisions on health apps.

Evaluation of the Access Bio CareStart rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen test in asymptomatic individuals tested at a community mass-testing program in Western Massachusetts

Point-of-care antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) to detect Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) represent a scalable tool for surveillance of active SARS-CoV-2 infections in the population. Data on the performance of these tests in real-world community settings are paramount to guide their implementation to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the performance characteristics of the CareStart COVID-19 Antigen test (CareStart) in a community testing site in Holyoke, Massachusetts. We compared CareStart to a SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) reference, both using anterior nasal swab samples. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and the expected positive and negative predictive values at different SARS-CoV-2 prevalence estimates. We performed 666 total tests on 591 unique individuals. 573 (86%) were asymptomatic. There were 52 positive tests by RT-qPCR. The sensitivity of CareStart was 49.0% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 34.8-63.4) and specificity was 99.5% (95% CI 98.5-99.9). Among positive RT-qPCR tests, the median cycle threshold (Ct) was significantly lower in samples that tested positive on CareStart. Using a Ct ≤ 30 as a benchmark for positivity increased the sensitivity of the test to 64.9% (95% CI 47.5-79.8). Our study shows that CareStart has a high specificity and moderate sensitivity. The utility of RDTs, such as CareStart, in mass implementation should prioritize use cases in which a higher specificity is more important, such as triage tests to rule-in active infections in community surveillance programs.

The influencing factors of digital health passport adoption and acceptance during COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia

Background

The COVID-19 outbreak has left a destructive trail around the world in terms of deaths, travel restrictions, trade deficits, and an economy that is collapsing, including job losses, real estate, health benefit loss, and a decrease in the quality of access to care and services in almost all sectors, as well as generally in the overall quality of life. The successful development of COVID-19 vaccines may hasten the acceleration of global post-pandemic recovery by vaccinating residents, with a particular focus on important groups, in order to decrease secondary transmission. This will facilitate the easing of enforced restrictions on global and local travel, the tourism industry, education sectors, and other aspects of social life. Vaccinating residents may also help reduce the risk of secondary transmission. The efforts that Saudi Arabia made to control the epidemic were outstanding on all fronts and in all spheres, including the health, education, commerce, and tourism industries, among others.

Objective

The purpose of this research was to investigate the elements that influence a traveler's decision to acquire and use a digital health passport (DHP), which was introduced by the Tawakkalna application in Saudi Arabia at the COVID-19 conference.

Methods

The technology acceptance model (TAM) and the information system success model (ISSM) were the primary theoretical frameworks that guided this investigation. The terms "perceived ease of use" (PEOU), "perceived usefulness" (PU), "information quality" (IQ), "service quality" (SQ), and "net benefit" (NB) were applied in order to investigate the user's acceptance and use of the DHP, as well as how it contributes to the facilitation of traveling and public perception toward using the DHP.

Results

In order to assess the validity of the proposed model and its four assumptions, a survey was sent through social media platforms to get responses from nationals and residents of Saudi Arabia. The SPSS program was used to evaluate a total of 103 replies that were considered valid. Following the completion of the study, the findings revealed that PEOU, PU, IQ, SQ, and NB all had favorable impacts on the use of DHP.

Conclusion

PEOU, PU, IQ, and SQ have a significant relationship with NB that affects the public's acceptance and use of DHP. This study has established validity and reliability while testing the relationship between the variables suggested in the research model.

Effects of vaccine registration on disease prophylaxis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The impact of the pandemic caused by the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), causing the disease COVID-19, has brought losses to the world in terms of deaths, economic and health problems. The expected return of the public to activities adapted to the new health situation led to discussions about the use of vaccination and its effects. However, the demand for proof of vaccination showed how inconsistent, unregistered, and uncontrolled this health process is with current technologies. Despite the proven effectiveness of vaccines in reducing infection rates, mortality, and morbidity, there are still doubts about their use in preventing certain infections and injuries, as well as the use of digital medical records for identification at public events and disease prevention. Therefore, this review aims to analyze the use of digital immunization cards in disease prevention in general.

METHODS

A systematic review of Science, PubMed/MEDLINE, LILACS /BSV, CINALH, and IEEE and Xplore was performed using PRISMA guidelines. The authors summarized the studies conducted over the last decade on the impacts of prophylaxis by control through immunization cards. Studies were selected using the following terms: Vaccination; Mobile Applications; Health Smarts Cards; Immunization Programs; Vaccination Coverage. For data analysis, we used Mendeley, Excel, RStudio, and Bibliometrix software among others.

RESULTS

A total of 1828 publications were found. After applying eligibility criteria (Articles published in Portuguese, Spanish or English in the last 10 years). Studies that only dealt with paper or physical records were excluded, as well as studies that were not linked to their country's health Department, as a possibility of bias exists with these types of information). After removing duplicates and applying filters 1 and 2, we included 18 studies in this review. This resulted in 18 papers that met our priori inclusion criteria; it was found that the most relevant sources were from the databases of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the selected studies, we found that scientific evidence and epidemiological surveillance are essential tools to characterize the efficiency and effectiveness of immunization passport protection intervention and to ethically justify them. Technological development of digital vaccine passports can assist in vaccination programs and positively impact disease prophylaxis.

Vaccine passports and health disparities: a perilous journey

This paper raises health equity concerns about the use of passports for domestic and international travel to certify COVID-19 vaccination. Part I argues that for international travel, health equity objections undercut arguments defending vaccine passports, which are based on tholding people responsible, protecting global health, safeguarding individual liberty and continuing current practice. Part II entertains a proposal for a scaled down vaccine passport for domestic use in countries where vaccines are widely and equitably available. It raises health equity concerns related to racial profiling and fairness to people who are vaccine cautious. Part III sets forth a proposal for a flexible pass that certifies people who have been vaccinated, tested, previously infected or granted a conscientious objection. It sets ethical guidelines for the timing and use of flexible passes that promote equity, public health education, antidiscrimination, privacy and flexibility.

Improving preparedness for next pandemics: Max level of COVID-19 vaccinations without social impositions to design effective health policy and avoid flawed democracies

In the presence of pandemic threats, such as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis, vaccination is one of the fundamental strategies to cope with negative effects of new viral agents in society. The rollout of vast vaccination campaigns also generates the main issue of hesitancy and resistance to vaccines in a share of people. Many studies have investigated how to reduce the social resistance to vaccinations, however the maximum level of vaccinable people against COVID-19 (and in general against pandemic diseases), without coercion in countries, is unknown. The goal of this study is to solve the problem here by developing an empirical analysis, based on global data, to estimate the max share of people vaccinable in relation to socioeconomic wellbeing of nations. Results, based on 150 countries, reveal that vaccinations increase with the income per capita, achieving the maximum share of about 70% of total population, without coercion. This information can provide new knowledge to establish the appropriate goal of vaccination campaigns and in general of health policies to cope with next pandemic impacts, without restrictions that create socioeconomic problems. Overall, then, nations have a natural level of max vaccinable people (70% of population), but strict policies and mandates to achieve 90% of vaccinated population can reduce the quality of democracy and generate socioeconomic issues higher than (pandemic) crisis.

Public views on the Covid-19 immunity certificate: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Already in its first implementation, the introduction of the Covid-19 immunity certificate has generated some debate among the public. This debate might be a hindrance to the effective realization of this policy. This study aimed to systematically review published research evaluating public feeling of the Covid-19 immunity certificate policy measure and to find which factors might influence its acceptance.

METHODS

We followed the scoping review methods manual by the Joanna Briggs Institute. We included studies with no time limits that presented novel data, and no exclusions have been made based on study design. We excluded articles that presented just expert opinions.

RESULTS

We found and reviewed 17 articles. The included studies were conducted in two main countries (the United Kingdom and Switzerland), with the rest from Israel, Italy, Spain, Germany, Australia, Taiwan and China. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were included, and nonrepresentative samples were mostly used to explore the public feeling about the Covid-19 immunity certification. The included studies showed that public views on immunity certification are quite contradictory and influenced by age, gender, ethnicity, political orientation and attitudes towards Covid-19 vaccination. The topic more often addressed by the included studies was the public's views on the positive and negative implications of the Covid-19 immunity certificate in terms of ethical, legal and behavioural consequences of this measure.

CONCLUSION

The varying acceptance rates are notable and may partly be linked to differences in demographics, Covid-19 concerns and ideological beliefs, as seen in other health-related tracking policies. Moreover, dominant factors behind the (un)success of this policy are complex and entangled with the cultural and political dimensions rather than being just technical. For this reason, it is important to expand psychosocial research to better understand the concerns behind health certifications and allow planning of culturally based and ethically sound suitable strategies. This would be very relevant to increasing public approval and compliance with this public health measure.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This does not apply to our work as it was a review paper.

More Time, Carrot-and-Stick, or Piling Coffins? Estimating the Role of Factors Overcoming COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Poland and Lithuania in the Years 2021–2022

In this study, motivation for late (from 2021-W22, i.e., 24 July 2021) uptake of the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine among adults in Poland and Lithuania is indirectly measured in order to avoid social-desirability bias or rationalisation in retrospect of prior decisions. Weekly vaccine uptake is modeled as if vaccine hesitant people were late adopters of a new product, with a fitted non-linear trend representing steadily decreasing interest. Before the analysed period, the vaccine uptake among Polish and Lithuanian adults was almost identical. Vaccination simply explainable by the trend was responsible for the vaccination of an additional 19.96% and 19.06% adults, respectively. The fear incurred by spikes in consecutive waves of infection motivated 3.20% and 3.89% more people, respectively, while the COVID-19 passport, introduced only in Lithuania, convinced an additional 13.98% of the overall population. The effect of the COVID passport was the biggest in the 18–24 age group, and the least visible among people aged 80 or more. In the latter group, other factors also had a limited impact, with merely 1.32% tempted by the one-time €100 payment offered to everybody aged 75 or more.

Stamping the vaccine passport? Public support for lifting COVID-19 related restrictions for vaccinated citizens in France, Germany, and Sweden

During theCOVID-19pandemic,manycountries implementedrestrictionsto limit the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (e.g. travel restrictions and lockdowns).One path to loosening restrictions is to do so selectively only for vaccinated individuals (e.g. by implementing vaccine passports domestically or as a prerequisite for international travel).Setting different rules based on people's vaccination statusis howevera contentious issue among health policy experts, government officials, and the public. Our analysis focuses on the levels and correlates of public support for the lifting of restrictions for the vaccinatedin April 2021, i.e. at a time when restrictions were in place and aselective lifting of these restrictions just for the vaccinatedwas debated in Europe.We use representative quota samples of the populations of France (N = 1,752), Germany (N = 1,759), and Sweden (N = 1,754). We find that a slight plurality support lifting restrictions for the vaccinated in France and Germany but not in Sweden. Vaccine hesitancy emerges as strong predictor of opposition to such a policy. Additionally, individuals who are already vaccinated (in France and Germany) and who are higher in risk-seeking express more support for the lifting of restrictions for the vaccinated. We discuss implications for the debate on vaccine passports.

Addressing vaccine hesitancy and resistance for COVID-19 vaccines

The COVID-19 vaccine rollout has had various degrees of success in different countries. Achieving high levels of vaccine coverage is key to responding to and mitigating the impact of the pandemic on health and aged care systems and the community. In many countries, vaccine hesitancy, resistance, and refusal are emerging as significant barriers to immunisation uptake and the relaxation of policies that limit everyday life. Vaccine hesitancy/ resistance/ refusal is complex and multi-faceted. Individuals and groups have diverse and often multiple reasons for delaying or refusing vaccination. These reasons include: social determinants of health, convenience, ease of availability and access, health literacy understandability and clarity of information, judgements around risk versus benefit, notions of collective versus individual responsibility, trust or mistrust of authority or healthcare, and personal or group beliefs, customs, or ideologies. Published evidence suggests that targeting and adapting interventions to particular population groups, contexts, and specific reasons for vaccine hesitancy/ resistance may enhance the effectiveness of interventions. While evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions to address vaccine hesitancy and improve uptake is limited and generally unable to underpin any specific strategy, multi-pronged interventions are promising. In many settings, mandating vaccination, particularly for those working in health or high risk/ transmission industries, has been implemented or debated by Governments, decision-makers, and health authorities. While mandatory vaccination is effective for seasonal influenza uptake amongst healthcare workers, this evidence may not be appropriately transferred to the context of COVID-19. Financial or other incentives for addressing vaccine hesitancy may have limited effectiveness with much evidence for benefit appearing to have been translated across from other public/preventive health issues such as smoking cessation. Multicomponent, dialogue-based (i.e., communication) interventions are effective in addressing vaccine hesitancy/resistance. Multicomponent interventions that encompasses the following might be effective: (i) targeting specific groups such as unvaccinated/under-vaccinated groups or healthcare workers, (ii) increasing vaccine knowledge and awareness, (iii) enhanced access and convenience of vaccination, (iv) mandating vaccination or implementing sanctions against non-vaccination, (v) engaging religious and community leaders, (vi) embedding new vaccine knowledge and evidence in routine health practices and procedures, and (vii) addressing mistrust and improving trust in healthcare providers and institutions via genuine engagement and dialogue. It is universally important that healthcare professionals and representative groups, as often highly trusted sources of health guidance, should be closely involved in policymaker and health authority decisions regarding the establishment and implementation of vaccine recommendations and interventions to address vaccine hesitancy.

The unnaturalistic fallacy: COVID-19 vaccine mandates should not discriminate against natural immunity

COVID-19 vaccine requirements have generated significant debate. Here, we argue that, on the evidence available, such policies should have recognised proof of natural immunity as a sufficient basis for exemption to vaccination requirements. We begin by distinguishing our argument from two implausible claims about natural immunity: (1) natural immunity is superior to 'artificial' vaccine-induced immunity simply because it is 'natural' and (2) it is better to acquire immunity through natural infection than via vaccination. We then briefly survey the evidence base for the comparison between naturally acquired immunity and vaccine-induced immunity. While we clearly cannot settle the scientific debates on this point, we suggest that we lack clear and convincing scientific evidence that vaccine-induced immunity has a significantly higher protective effect than natural immunity. Since vaccine requirements represent a substantial infringement of individual liberty, as well as imposing other significant costs, they can only be justified if they are necessary for achieving a proportionate public health benefit. Without compelling evidence for the superiority of vaccine-induced immunity, it cannot be deemed necessary to require vaccination for those with natural immunity. Subjecting them to vaccine mandates is therefore not justified. We conclude by defending the standard of proof that this argument from necessity invokes, and address other pragmatic and practical considerations that may speak against natural immunity exemptions.

Citizens’ Perception of COVID-19 Passport Usefulness: A Cross Sectional Study

This paper assesses the influence on people’s perception of the utility of the immunity passport (IP) program by sociodemographic factors, infectivity status, and the objective of its use. The material of this paper is a cross-sectional survey of 400 residents in Spain. The relation between utility perception and input variables is fitted with ordinary least squares (OLS) regression and linear quantile regression (LQR). The principal explanatory variable of usefulness perception is being vaccinated, especially when the objective of the IP is regulating mobility. The OLS estimate of the coefficient regression is (cr) = 0.415 (p = 0.001). We also found a positive and significant influence of that factor in all LQRs (cr = 0.652, p = 0.0026 at level (τ) = 0.75; cr = 0.482, p = 0.0047 at τ = 0.5 and cr = 0.201, p = 0.0385 at τ = 0.25). When the objective of the IP is regulating leisure, being vaccinated is relevant only to explain the central measures of usefulness perception. If the IP is used to regulate traveling, variables related to interviewees’ infectivity have greater relevance than sociodemographic factors. When its objective is ruling assembly, the more important variables than being vaccinated are gender and age. To create an effective implementation of the IP, it is advisable to have a general agreement among the population on its convenience. Therefore, the findings in this study have important implications for public health decision-makers.

Efficacy of POC Antibody Assays after COVID-19 Infection and Potential Utility for "Immunity Passports"

OBJECTIVE

Numerous manufacturers market lateral flow assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, but there are many questions about the reliability and efficacy of these tests.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Serum specimens from 60 individuals were analyzed using 2 lateral flow antibody assays, an in-house enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG chemiluminescent immunoassay.

RESULTS

The BioMedomics and Premier Biotech lateral flow assays were positive for IgM in 73.3% and 70% and for IgG in 80% and 73.3% of specimens, respectively. The ELISA assay was positive for IgM and IgG in 73.3% and 86.7% of specimens from infected individuals, whereas the Abbott assay was positive in 80%. The specificities of the 4 assays ranged from 96.7% to 100% for IgM and from 93.3% to 100% for IgG.

CONCLUSION

Results of the 2 lateral flow assays were comparable to those of the ELISA and Abbott assays. Assay efficacy depended on length of time after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Perspectives of healthcare workers in South Africa on COVID-19 vaccination passports

Background

Following the rollout of several effective vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many countries have introduced vaccination passports or certificates as a means of certifying that an individual has been vaccinated against, is immune to, or is presently uninfected with COVID-19. An extensive ethical debate has ensued.

Aim

To determine the perspectives of South African healthcare workers (HCWs) on the implementation of COVID-19 vaccination passports (C19VPs) in South Africa (SA).

Setting

Healthcare workers working in various fields and practice settings throughout SA were invited to complete an online questionnaire.

Methods

An online questionnaire was distributed using convenience sampling via social media platforms to HCWs over a 1-month period, collecting demographic details and responses to 8 Likert-type items regarding agreement with C19VPs, ethical issues and feasibility. Each item was graded from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), with grouping of 4 of the 8 items exploring a common theme of C19VPs being a good idea, constituting a score out of 20. Non-parametric tests were performed to determine differences in responses between groups.

Results

One thousand HCWs responded to the survey and fulfilled inclusion criteria. The majority (83.2%) of respondents were medical practitioners (MPs). Overall, most (73.5%) respondents agreed that C19VPs are a good idea. Older respondents agreed more strongly than younger respondents (medians 18 and 17, respectively, p = 0.001), and respondents in private practice agreed more strongly than those in state practice (medians 18 and 16, respectively, p = 0.042). The median response was neutral (3) in response to the ethics of C19VPs considering variations in vaccine access and tending towards disagreement (2.5) in disadvantaging poorer people. Most respondents disagreed that vaccine hesitancy would make C19VPs unethical, and responses from provinces with the highest vaccination proportions disagreed more than others with lower vaccination proportion (median 2 compared with 3, p < 0.001). There was uncertainty about the feasibility of C19VPs in SA, with older HCWs, non-students, senior MPs and those who thought C19VPs are a good idea being more likely to consider them feasible.

Conclusion

The perspectives of HCWs, mainly MPs, about C19VPs in SA were obtained. Further research should focus on vaccine hesitancy and its factors in HCWs and the effect of C19VPs on restrictions, reduction in transmission and benefits on economies and mental health.

Contribution

To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first survey data published on the perspectives of South African HCWs on C19VPs in the country. Healthcare workers are trusted influencers of vaccination decisions, and their opinion on vaccination certificates may also influence the South African public’s perception and acceptance thereof.

The new normal: Covid-19 risk perceptions and support for continuing restrictions past vaccinations

I test the possibility that over-estimating negative consequences of COVID-19 (e.g., hospitalizations, deaths, and threats to children) will be associated with stronger support the 'new normal' (i.e., continuation of restrictions for an undefined period starting with wide-spread access to vaccines and completed vaccinations of vulnerable people). The new normal was assessed by endorsing practices such as vaccine passports, travel restrictions, mandatory masking, continuing contact tracing, and pursuing elimination. Results are based on five samples (N = 1,233 from April 2021 and N = 264 from January 2022) and suggest that people over-estimate COVID-19 risks to children and healthy people, as evidenced by median estimates that 5% of all global deaths were children, 29% were generally healthy people under 65, and that a healthy person under the age of 65 has 5% chance of dying from COVID-19. Over-estimates observed in this study align with those based on representative samples, and they were consistently related to stronger support for the new normal. This relationship emerged when participants estimated risks with percentages (core indicators) and indicated the extent to which risk-based statements are true/supported with evidence or false/unsupported (alternative indicators). People were notably more likely to support continuing restrictions if they believed that COVID-19 risk and risk mitigation tactics are true, even when they are not (e.g., children need to be prioritized for boosters). These relationships persisted when considering competing explanations (political ideology, statistics literacy, belief in conspiracy theories). I trace these effects to well-meaning efforts to prevent under-estimation. Public policy and people's perceptions of risks are intertwined, where even inaccurate judgments may influence decisions. Failure to combat all misinformation with equal rigor may jeopardize the restoration of the social and economic life essential for building adaptive post-pandemic societies.

Risk assessment of COVID-19 epidemic resurgence in relation to SARS-CoV-2 variants and vaccination passes

The introduction of COVID-19 vaccination passes (VPs) by many countries coincided with the Delta variant fast becoming dominant across Europe. A thorough assessment of their impact on epidemic dynamics is still lacking. Here, we propose the VAP-SIRS model that considers possibly lower restrictions for the VP holders than for the rest of the population, imperfect vaccination effectiveness against infection, rates of (re-)vaccination and waning immunity, fraction of never-vaccinated, and the increased transmissibility of the Delta variant. Some predicted epidemic scenarios for realistic parameter values yield new COVID-19 infection waves within two years, and high daily case numbers in the endemic state, even without introducing VPs and granting more freedom to their holders. Still, suitable adaptive policies can avoid unfavorable outcomes. While VP holders could initially be allowed more freedom, the lack of full vaccine effectiveness and increased transmissibility will require accelerated (re-)vaccination, wide-spread immunity surveillance, and/or minimal long-term common restrictions.

Assessing the impact of vaccines, other public health measures, and declining immunity on SARS-CoV-2 control is challenging. This is particularly true in the context of vaccination passes, whereby vaccinated individuals have more freedom of making contacts than unvaccinated ones. Here, we use a mathematical model to simulate various scenarios and investigate the likelihood of containing COVID-19 outbreaks in example European countries. We demonstrate that both Alpha and Delta SARS-CoV-2 variants inevitably lead to recurring outbreaks when measures are lifted for vaccination pass holders. High re-vaccination rates and a lowered fraction of the unvaccinated population increase the benefit of vaccination passes. These observations are important for policy making, highlighting the need for continued vigilance, even where the epidemic is under control, especially when new variants of concern emerge.

Krueger, Gogolewski, and Bodych et al. assess the risk of COVID-19 epidemic resurgence in relation to SARS-CoV-2 variants and vaccination passes. Their model predicts that new COVID-19 infection waves within two years from the onset of the vaccination program are possible but that suitable adaptive policies can help to avoid unfavorable outcomes.

Performance Evaluation of Lateral Flow Assays for Coronavirus Disease-19 Serology

The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has undoubtedly resulted in significant morbidities, mortalities, and economic disruptions across the globe. Affordable and scalable tools to monitor the transmission dynamics of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the longevity of induced antibodies will be paramount to monitor and control the pandemic as multiple waves continue to rage in many countries. Serologic assays detect humoral responses to the virus, to determine seroprevalence in target populations, or induction of antibodies at the individual level following either natural infection or vaccination. With multiple vaccines rolling out globally, serologic assays to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies will be important tools to monitor the development of herd immunity. To address this need, serologic lateral flow assays (LFAs), which can be easily implemented for both population surveillance and home use, will be vital to monitor the evolution of the pandemic and inform containment measures. Such assays are particularly important for monitoring the transmission dynamics and durability of immunity generated by natural infections and vaccination, particularly in resource-limited settings. In this review, we discuss considerations for evaluating the accuracy of these LFAs, their suitability for different use cases, and implementation opportunities.

Modelling the impact of vaccine hesitancy in prolonging the need for Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions to control the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Vaccine hesitancy - a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite availability - has the potential to threaten the successful roll-out of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines globally. In this study, we aim to understand the likely impact of vaccine hesitancy on the control of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We modelled the potential impact of vaccine hesitancy on the control of the pandemic and the relaxation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) by combining an epidemiological model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission with data on vaccine hesitancy from population surveys.

Results

Our simulations suggest that the mortality over a 2-year period could be up to 7.6 times higher in countries with high vaccine hesitancy compared to an ideal vaccination uptake if NPIs are relaxed. Alternatively, high vaccine hesitancy could prolong the need for NPIs to remain in place.

Conclusions

While vaccination is an individual choice, vaccine-hesitant individuals have a substantial impact on the pandemic trajectory, which may challenge current efforts to control COVID-19. In order to prevent such outcomes, addressing vaccine hesitancy with behavioural interventions is an important priority in the control of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Factors associated with the opposition to COVID-19 vaccination certificates: A multi-country observational study from Asia

BACKGROUND

There are ongoing calls to harmonise and increase the use of COVID-19 vaccination certificates (CVCs) in Asia. Identifying groups in Asian societies who oppose CVCs and understanding their reasons can help formulate an effective CVCs policy in the region. However, no formal studies have explored this issue in Asia.

METHOD

The COVID-19 Vaccination Policy Research and Decision-Support Initiative in Asia (CORESIA) was established to address policy questions related to CVCs. An online cross-sectional survey was conducted from June to October 2021 in nine Asian countries. Multivariable logistical regression analyses were performed to identify potential opposers of CVCs.

RESULTS

Six groups were identified as potential opposers of CVCs: (i) unvaccinated (Odd Ratio (OR): 2.01, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.65-2.46); vaccine hesitant and those without access to COVID-19 vaccines; (ii) those not wanting existing NPIs to continue (OR: 2.97, 95% CI: 2.51-3.53); (iii) those with low level of trust in governments (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.02-2.52); (iv) those without travel plans (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.31-1.90); (v) those expecting no financial gains from CVCs (OR: 2.35, 95% CI: 1.98-2.78); and (vi) those disagreeing to use CVCs for employment, education, events, hospitality, and domestic travel.

CONCLUSIONS

Addressing recurring public health bottlenecks such as vaccine hesitancy and equitable access, adherence to policies, public trust, and changing the narrative from 'societal-benefit' to 'personal-benefit' may be necessary and may help increase wider adoption of CVCs in Asia.

Ethical Attitudes toward COVID-19 Passports: Evidences from Spain

A so-called COVID-19 passport or Immunity passport (IP) has been proposed to facilitate the mobility of individuals while the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic persists. A COVID-19 passport can play a key role in the control of the pandemic, specifically in areas with a high density of population, and the help of smart city technology could be very useful to successfully implement IPs. This research studies the impact of ethical judgments on user attitudes toward using vaccine passports based on a Multidimensional Ethics Scale (MES) that contains five ethical constructs: moral equity, relativism, egoism, utilitarianism, and contractualism. Regression analysis shows that MES satisfactorily explains attitude (R² = 87.82%, p < 0.001) and that a positive evaluation in moral equity, egoism and utilitarianism is significant (p < 0.001). The objective of the passport (variable leisure) shows a significant negative moderating effect on moral equity (coefficient = −0.147, p = 0.0302) and a positive one on relativism (coefficient = 0.158, p = 0.0287). Adjustment by means of fsQCA shows that five ethical constructs satisfactorily explain both favorable and unfavorable attitudes toward IPs. Solutions explaining acceptance attain an overall consistency (cons) = 0.871 and coverage (cov) = 0.980. In the case of resistance, we found that cons = 0.979 and cov = 0.775. However, that influence is asymmetrical. To have a positive attitude toward the passport, it is a sufficient condition to attain a positive evaluation on a single ethical factor. On the other hand, when explaining resistance, and with the exception of the recipe ~utilitarianism (cons = 0.911 and cov = 0.859), explanatory prime implications require the interaction of at least two variables. Likewise, the context in which the passport is required is significant to explain rejection.

Lessons from Israel's COVID-19 Green Pass program

As of the beginning of March 2021, Israeli law requires the presentation of a Green Pass as a precondition for entering certain businesses and public spheres. Entitlement for a Green Pass is granted to Israelis who have been vaccinated with two doses of COVID-19 vaccine, who have recovered from COVID-19, or who are participating in a clinical trial for vaccine development in Israel. The Green Pass is essential for retaining immune individuals' freedom of movement and for promoting the public interest in reopening the economic, educational, and cultural spheres of activity. Nonetheless, and as the Green Pass imposes restrictions on the movement of individuals who had not been vaccinated or who had not recovered, it is not consonant with solidarity and trust building. Implementing the Green Pass provision while advancing its effectiveness on the one hand, and safeguarding equality, proportionality, and fairness on the other hand may imbue this measure with ethical legitimacy despite involving a potential breach of trust and solidarity.

Does the EU COVID Digital Certificate Strike a Reasonable Balance between Mobility Needs and Public Health?

The need to fight a highly aggressive virus such as SARS-CoV-2 has compelled governments to put in place measures, which, in the name of health protection, have constrained many freedoms we all enjoy, including freedom of movement, both nationally and within the European Union. In order to encourage and facilitate the return to free movement, the European Parliament has launched a "COVID-19 digital certificate". A spirited debate centered around the use of this certificate is still ongoing among scholars, many of whom have pointed out the uncertainties relative to COVID-19 immunity, privacy issues and the risk of discriminatory effects. The authors, while highlighting some critical aspects, argue that the COVID digital certificate in its current approved version can effectively help prevent the spread of the infection and promote free movement, while upholding the right to health as much as possible. However, they also stress the need for a thorough information campaign to illustrate the advantages and limitations of this document in order to avoid creating a false sense of security in the public opinion, who may wrongly assume that the emergency has been overcome for good.

Passport to a Mighty Nation: Exploring Sociocultural Foundation of Chinese Public's Attitude to COVID-19 Vaccine Certificates

Vaccination against COVID-19 is essential against the pandemic. There are broad discussions on adopting certificates for vaccination and the immunity obtained after infection. Based on a national sample of over 2000 participants administered in April 2021, the current study examines the Chinese public's attitudes to the so-called COVID-19 vaccination passport and factors contributing to their viewpoints. Generally, the Chinese people had favorable opinions on the passport. Among possible contributing factors, income, personal benefit perception, the subjective norm of COVID-19 vaccination, and nationalism were significantly associated with the public's positive attitude. At the same time, general vaccine knowledge and scientific literacy had an inconstant effect. Echoing recent studies, these findings reveal a collectivism-oriented attitude of the Chinese public towards the proposal to certify vaccination publicly. Theoretical and practical implications of the results were discussed.

COVID-19 transmission and the safety of air travel during the pandemic: a scoping review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To examine the literature assessing safety of air travel relating to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission from January 2020 to May 2021. The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on air travel and global mobility, and various efforts are being implemented to determine a safe way forward. As the pandemic evolves, so do the challenges that force various stakeholders, including the aviation industry, health authorities, and governments, to reassess and adapt their practices to ensure the safety of travellers.

RECENT FINDINGS

The literature was reviewed for multiple aspects of air travel safety during the COVID-19 pandemic. Recurring themes that surfaced included the pivotal role of commercial air travel in the geographic spread of COVID-19, the efficacy of travel restrictions and quarantines, inflight transmission risk and the role of preventive measures, the utility of pre and post flight testing, the development of effective vaccines and subsequent challenges of vaccine passports, and the ongoing threat of novel highly transmissible variants.

SUMMARY

Much uncertainty lies ahead within the domains of these findings, and ongoing research, discourse and review will be necessary to navigate and determine the future direction and safety of air travel. Recovery will be slow, necessitating innovative, multipronged and collaborative solutions.

[COVID-19 vaccination: the reality after clinical trials]

After the start of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, enough clinical experience is already accumulating, in the real world and outside clinical trials, to resolve some of the questions that are still pending about this problem. The Scientific Committee on COVID-19 of the Madrid College of Physicians has discussed and reviewed some of these issues with a multidisciplinary approach. The following document is an attempt to answer some of these questions with the information available so far. This document is structured in questions on different aspects of the indications, efficacy and tolerance of anti-COVID-19 vaccination.

The Future of Endoscopic Operations After the Coronavirus Pandemic

The unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic and its rapid global shutdowns have posed tremendous challenges for GI practices, including sudden delays in endoscopic procedures. As full reopening approaches, practices are wrestling with completely retooling their operations to ensure the resumption of high-quality, safe, and effective patient care. The pandemic's long-term effects on practice operations must be assessed: What will postpandemic GI care look like? Will some aspects of our work be changed forever, and if so, what are the practice management implications? This chapter surveys the pandemic's impact on US-based GI practices and discusses key "lessons learned" for future operations.

"Vaccine Passports" May Backfire: Findings from a Cross-Sectional Study in the UK and Israel on Willingness to Get Vaccinated against COVID-19

Domestic “vaccine passports” are being implemented across the world as a way of increasing vaccinated people’s freedom of movement and to encourage vaccination. However, these vaccine passports may affect people’s vaccination decisions in unintended and undesirable ways. This cross-sectional study investigated whether people’s willingness and motivation to get vaccinated relate to their psychological needs (autonomy, competence and relatedness), and how vaccine passports might affect these needs. Across two countries and 1358 participants, we found that need frustration—particularly autonomy frustration—was associated with lower willingness to get vaccinated and with a shift from self-determined to external motivation. In Israel (a country with vaccine passports), people reported greater autonomy frustration than in the UK (a country without vaccine passports). Our findings suggest that control measures, such as domestic vaccine passports, may have detrimental effects on people’s autonomy, motivation, and willingness to get vaccinated. Policies should strive to achieve a highly vaccinated population by supporting individuals’ autonomous motivation to get vaccinated and using messages of autonomy and relatedness, rather than applying pressure and external controls.

A high-throughput cell- and virus-free assay shows reduced neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 variants by COVID-19 convalescent plasma

The detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibodies in the serum of an individual indicates previous infection or vaccination. However, it provides limited insight into the protective nature of this immune response. Neutralizing antibodies recognizing the viral spike protein are more revealing, yet their measurement traditionally requires virus- and cell-based systems that are costly, time-consuming, inflexible, and potentially biohazardous. Here, we present a cell-free quantitative neutralization assay based on the competitive inhibition of trimeric SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binding to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor. This high-throughput method matches the performance of the gold standard live virus infection assay, as verified with a panel of 206 seropositive donors with varying degrees of infection severity and virus-specific immunoglobulin G titers, achieving 96.7% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Furthermore, it allows for the parallel assessment of neutralizing activities against multiple SARS-CoV-2 spike protein variants of concern. We used our assay to profile serum samples from 59 patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We found that although most sera had high activity against the 2019-nCoV parental spike protein and, to a lesser extent, the α (B.1.1.7) variant, only 58% of serum samples could efficiently neutralize a spike protein derivative containing mutations present in the β (B.1.351) variant. Thus, we have developed an assay that can evaluate effective neutralizing antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein variants of concern after natural infection and that can be applied to characterize vaccine-induced antibody responses or to assess the potency of monoclonal antibodies.

Scientists have favorable opinions on immunity certificates but raise concerns regarding fairness and inequality

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we collected over 12,000 responses from a survey of scientists, who were asked to express their opinions on immunity certificates (also called "immunity passports") as a potential instrument to lessen the impact of the crisis. Overall, we find that scientists perceive immunity certificates as favorable for public health (50.2%) and the state of the economy (54.4%) while one-fifth (19.1%) and one-sixth (15.4%) disagree. Scientists stipulate some concerns about fairness (36.5%) and inequality (22.4%) arising from implementation of immunity certification. We find some smaller differences among scientific fields, particularly between health scientists and social scientists, with the latter being slightly more positive about the effect of immunity certification. Scholars in the United States, including health scientists, are more likely to view the immunity certificates favorably and mention fewer concerns about this policy's effect on fairness and inequality. Female scholars are significantly less in favor of immunity certificates, while scientists with more conservative political views hold more favorable opinions. Our results reveal that given the uncertainties during an early phase of a pandemic, scientists see scope for immunity certification to lessen the general societal impacts of the crisis.

The preparation of N-IgY targeting SARS-CoV-2 and its immunomodulation to IFN-γ production in vitro

Specific antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 structural protein have a wide range of effects in the diagnose, prevention and treatment of the COVID-19 epidemic. Among them, egg yolk immunoglobulin Y (IgY), which has high safety, high yield, and without inducing antibody-dependent enhancement, is an important biological candidate. In this study, specific IgY against the conservative nucleocapsid protein (NP) of SARS-CoV-2 was obtained by immunizing hens. Through a series of optimized precipitation and ultrafiltration extraction schemes, its purity was increased to 98%. The hyperimmune IgY against NP (N-IgY) at a titer of 1:50,000 showed strong NP binding ability, which laid the foundation of N-IgY's application targeting NP. In an in vitro immunoregulatory study, N-IgY (1 mg/mL) modulated NP-induced immune response by alleviating type II interferon secretion stimulated by NP (20 μg/mL). In summary, N-IgY can be mass produced by achievable method, which endows it with potential value against the current COVID-19 pandemic.

A Game of Covid: Strategic Thoughts About a Ludified Pandemic

Many aspects of handling the COVID-19 pandemic bear a resemblance to patterns found in games. We observe point displays and leader boards, the visible assumption of roles, classic archetypes, the collection of resources, and spatial awareness. We argue that these patterns manifest spontaneously as a form of analogical reasoning, because people lack cultural and individual norms as well as cognitive scripts for a pandemic. Trying to find systematic similarities between a novel and a familiar situation is an essential cognitive strategy and a cultural tool, resulting in a spontaneous ludification of this crisis. Unfortunately, most institutions, the media and policymakers focus on attributes that are easy to communicate, not on relations and causal chains. This results in shallow analogies, where the mechanisms and dynamics of COVID-19 are not addressed. This can cause a sense of helplessness, where many people remain passive viewers. A pandemic, however, calls for cooperative action of people who understand the relations between different factors and stakeholders in order to mitigate several negative effects linked to such a crisis. We propose a psychologically founded “Strategic gamification” (here in the context of a pandemic), a form of sense-making that builds on spontaneously emerging ludic elements. By extending upon those elements through the lens of game design, we can shape the mechanics, dynamics and esthetics of a serious context in a more meaningful way. The resulting analogies have better predictive power and are suited to utilize positive aspects of gamification like engagement, elaboration and collaboration.

Behavioural responses to Covid-19 health certification: a rapid review

BACKGROUND

Covid-status certification - certificates for those who test negative for the SARS-CoV-2 virus, test positive for antibodies, or who have been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 - has been proposed to enable safer access to a range of activities. Realising these benefits will depend in part upon the behavioural and social impacts of certification. The aim of this rapid review was to describe public attitudes towards certification, and its possible impact on uptake of testing and vaccination, protective behaviours, and crime.

METHOD

A search was undertaken in peer-reviewed databases, pre-print databases, and the grey literature, from 2000 to December 2020. Studies were included if they measured attitudes towards or behavioural consequences of health certificates based on one of three indices of Covid-19 status: test-negative result for current infectiousness, test-positive for antibodies conferring natural immunity, or vaccination(s) conferring immunity.

RESULTS

Thirty-three papers met the inclusion criteria, only three of which were rated as low risk of bias. Public attitudes were generally favourable towards the use of immunity certificates for international travel, but unfavourable towards their use for access to work and other activities. A significant minority was strongly opposed to the use of certificates of immunity for any purpose. The limited evidence suggested that intention to get vaccinated varied with the activity enabled by certification or vaccination (e.g., international travel). Where vaccination is seen as compulsory this could lead to unwillingness to accept a subsequent vaccination. There was some evidence that restricting access to settings and activities to those with antibody test certificates may lead to deliberate exposure to infection in a minority. Behaviours that reduce transmission may decrease upon health certificates based on any of the three indices of Covid-19 status, including physical distancing and handwashing.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited evidence suggests that health certification in relation to COVID-19 - outside of the context of international travel - has the potential for harm as well as benefit. Realising the benefits while minimising the harms will require real-time evaluations allowing modifications to maximise the potential contribution of certification to enable safer access to a range of activities.

Evaluation of serological lateral flow assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Lateral flow assays can detect anti-Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies to monitor transmission. However, standardized evaluation of their accuracy and tools to aid in interpreting results are needed.

METHODS

We evaluated 20 IgG and IgM assays selected from available tests in April 2020. We evaluated the assays' performance using 56 pre-pandemic negative and 56 SARS-CoV-2-positive plasma samples, collected 10-40 days after symptom onset, confirmed by a molecular test and analyzed by an ultra-sensitive immunoassay. Finally, we developed a user-friendly web app to extrapolate the positive predictive values based on their accuracy and local prevalence.

RESULTS

Combined IgG + IgM sensitivities ranged from 33.9 to 94.6%, while combined specificities ranged from 92.6 to 100%. The highest sensitivities were detected in Lumiquick for IgG (98.2%), BioHit for both IgM (96.4%), and combined IgG + IgM sensitivity (94.6%). Furthermore, 11 LFAs and 8 LFAs showed perfect specificity for IgG and IgM, respectively, with 15 LFAs showing perfect combined IgG + IgM specificity. Lumiquick had the lowest estimated limit-of-detection (LOD) (0.1 μg/mL), followed by a similar LOD of 1.5 μg/mL for CareHealth, Cellex, KHB, and Vivachek.

CONCLUSION

We provide a public resource of the accuracy of select lateral flow assays with potential for home testing. The cost-effectiveness, scalable manufacturing process, and suitability for self-testing makes LFAs an attractive option for monitoring disease prevalence and assessing vaccine responsiveness. Our web tool provides an easy-to-use interface to demonstrate the impact of prevalence and test accuracy on the positive predictive values.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies via rapid diagnostic immunoassays in COVID-19 patients

Background

Efficient monitoring and control of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) require access to diagnostic tests, and serological diagnostic testing is desirable. In the current study, antibodies were investigated in patients recently diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

Methods

Cross-sectional data were obtained from 245 patients in whom SARS-CoV-2 infection had been confirmed via real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction between March and October 2020. Serum samples were acquired between 2 and 60 days following the onset of COVID-19 symptoms or the first detection of SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic patients. All specimens were tested simultaneously using an IgM/IgG rapid diagnostic test (RDT), IgG nucleocapsid protein-based chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA), IgG, and IgA spike protein-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs). Blood donor samples obtained in 2018 were used as negative controls.

Results

The sensitivity and specificity of the RDT IgG were compared with the IgG immunoassays as standards. The RDT IgG exhibited 97.5% sensitivity and 89.4% specificity compared with a CMIA IgG, 98.4% sensitivity, and 78.8% specificity compared with an ELISA IgG. IgM, IgG, and IgA seropositivity rates were low between 1 and 2 weeks after COVID-19 symptom onset or the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. IgM seropositivity rate began decreasing after 4 weeks, whereas IgG and IgA seropositivity rate remained at appreciable levels over the 8-week study period. No cross-reactivity with seasonal coronaviruses was detected.

Conclusions

IgG RDT alone or combined with molecular diagnostic tests may be useful for identifying recent SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Catalysis on Nanostructured Indium Tin Oxide Surface for Fast and Inexpensive Probing of Antibodies during Pandemics

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a global threat to human health and the economy. Society needs inexpensive, fast, and accurate quantitative diagnostic tools. Here, we report a new approach using a solid-state biosensor to measure antibodies, which does not require functionalization, unlike conventional biosensors. A nanostructured semiconductor surface with catalytic properties was used as a transducer for rapid immobilization and measurement of the antibody. The transducer response was based on solid-state electronics properties. The changes on the surface of the semiconductor induced changes in the direct current (DC) surface resistivity. This was a result of a catalytic chemical reaction on that surface. This new low-cost approach reduced the response time of the measurement significantly, and it required only a very small amount of sample on the microliter scale.

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: a human enhancement story

BACKGROUND

Vaccination is an essential strategy for mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic. Besides its significance as a public health measure, vaccination is a sophisticated example of modern biotechnology. Since vaccination gives the human body an ability that it does not naturally possess, the question arises as to its classification as Human Enhancement.

MAIN BODY

Exemplified on a selection of different definitions, we conclude that vaccinations may indeed be classified and treated as a form of Human Enhancement. This raises some ethical issues that are notorious in the broad field of Human Enhancement. A study with N = 67 participants revealed that vaccinations are perceived neither as a clear nor poor example of Human Enhancement.

CONCLUSION

 We argue that qualifying vaccination technology as Human Enhancement does not provide convincing arguments to reject vaccination. By examining the Human Enhancement debate and the similarities to the issue of vaccination shown here, policymakers can learn valuable lessons regarding mass vaccination programs' current and future handling.

COVID-19 Pandemic: A Compressive Review on Gender, Herd Immunity, and Physiological Mechanisms

BACKGROUND

Researchers and scientists experienced the spread and aid recovery of the COVID-19 pandemic with a condition of great uncertainty. With limited understanding of SARS-CoV-2, current attempts at controlling its spread are focused on the suppressing approach (to reduce a sustained endogenous transmission) and the mitigating approach (to reduce the growth rate of the epidemic). On the one hand, while there has been no firm explanation, many governments have considered immunity passport and herd immunity for paths out of restrictive physical distancing measures imposed to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 but were not successful.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Herein, we attempted to systematize the lessons and shreds of evidence related to the spectrum of illness, the physiological mechanisms of host susceptibility, herd immunity, immunity passport, gender disparities, and severe challenges and uncertainties posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. We hope that the insights provided in this review will help raise the effectiveness of the treatment policies and preventive measures required to end the pandemic.

RECENT FINDINGS

The use of immunity passports is suggested to certify an individual at low risk of acquiring or transmitting SARS-CoV-2. But, an individual might nevertheless carry the virus at similar levels and for a similar duration to those previously uninfected, with an unchanged potential for transmission. Vaccine-induced herd immunity is a complex issue inherent to a vaccine and the population receiving the vaccine. The central epidemiological questions about are as follows: what proportion of the population should be vaccinated to meet elimination (in a local program), eradication (in a global program) or a defined level of control? How is this affected by demographic factors (such as gender)? What is the best age at which to immunize? Besides, although age-dependent mortality risk is estimated to be higher for men and older people, such interpretation across gender, age groups, and countries, however, must be accepted with caution at present.

SUMMARY

COVID-19 has taught us that health is the basis of global wealth and international solidarity is an essential response and a superior approach to isolationism. Hence, we must be clear about what the alternatives are when evaluating the merits of different ways of tackling this pandemic both in the short term as well as in the long term.