How did we protect children against COVID-19 in Iran? Prevalence of COVID-19 and vaccination in the socio-economic context of COVID-19 epidemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic posed significant risks to children worldwide. This study aimed to assess the COVID-19 protection status of children and explored the relationship between household socio-economic status and COVID-19 morbidity and preventive measures, including vaccination and mask-wearing, in two cities in Iran. METHOD: A population-based cross-sectional study was conducted from July to October 2022 among 7 to 18-year-old children and their families in Tehran and Karaj. A total of 3,022 samples were selected using stratified multistage cluster sampling. Data were collected through interviews with children and adults, using questionnaires and was analyzed with Stata software version 14. RESULTS: The analysis focused on 2,878 children with a median age of 12. Over half (54%) reported that the pandemic negatively affected their family's financial status, with 45% describing its impact on children's needs as negative or very negative. Just under 50% of respondents consistently wore masks during the study period, and around 54% had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Reasons for not getting vaccinated included concerns about side effects, ineligibility for the target age group, and overcrowding at vaccination sites. The odds of not getting vaccinated were significantly lower for children aged 15-18, with boys more likely to refuse vaccination than girls. CONCLUSION: The financial impact of the pandemic in Iran affected families' ability to meet their children's needs. Moreover, low vaccination acceptance rates increased children's vulnerability to health problems and contributed to COVID-19 infections. Efforts should be made to increase vaccination acceptance, particularly among immigrant populations.

Reporting of health equity considerations in vaccine trials for COVID-19: a methodological review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: An emerging body of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on COVID-19 vaccines has served as the evidence base for public health decision-making. While it is recommended that RCTs report results by health equity stratifiers to reduce bias in health care and gaps in research, it is unknown whether this was done in COVID-19 vaccine trials. To critically examine the use of health equity stratifiers in COVID-19 vaccine trials. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a methodological review of published COVID-19 vaccine trials available in the COVID-19 living Network Meta-Analysis systematic review database through February 8, 2023. Based on the PROGRESS-Plus framework, we examined the following health equity stratifiers: place of residence, race/ethnicity, occupation, gender/sex, religion, education, socio-economic status, social capital, age, disability, features of relationships, and temporary situations. We assessed each study in duplicate according to three criteria for comprehensive health-equity reporting: 1) describing participants, 2) reporting equity-relevant results, and 3) discussing equity-relevant implications of trial findings. RESULTS: We reviewed 144 trial manuscripts. The most frequently used PROGRESS-Plus stratifiers to describe participants were age (100%), place of residence (100%), gender/sex (99%), and race/ethnicity (64%). Age was most often used to disaggregate or adjust results (67%), followed by gender or sex (35%). Discussions of equity-relevant implications often indicated limited generalizability of results concerning age (40% of studies). Half (47%) of the studies considered at least one health equity stratifier for all three criteria. No trials included stratifiers related to religion, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, or features of relationships. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccine trials provided a limited description of health equity stratifiers as defined by PROGRESS-Plus and infrequently disaggregated results or discussed the study implications as they related to health equity. Considering the health disparities exacerbated during the pandemic, increased uptake of PROGRESS-Plus in RCTs would support a more nuanced understanding of health disparities and better inform actions to improve health equity.

Stroke Risk After COVID-19 Bivalent Vaccination Among US Older Adults.

Importance: In January 2023, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US Food and Drug Administration noted a safety concern for ischemic stroke among adults aged 65 years or older who received the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2; WT/OMI BA.4/BA.5 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine. Objective: To evaluate stroke risk after administration of (1) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, (2) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent plus a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine on the same day (concomitant administration), and (3) a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: Self-controlled case series including 11 001 Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (among 5 397 278 vaccinated individuals). The study period was August 31, 2022, through February 4, 2023. Exposures: Receipt of (1) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (primary) or (2) a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine (secondary). Main Outcomes and Measures: Stroke risk (nonhemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, combined outcome of nonhemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic stroke) during the 1- to 21-day or 22- to 42-day risk window after vaccination vs the 43- to 90-day control window. Results: There were 5 397 278 Medicare beneficiaries who received either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (median age, 74 years [IQR, 70-80 years]; 56% were women). Among the 11 001 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, there were no statistically significant associations between either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine and the outcomes of nonhemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, nonhemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic stroke during the 1- to 21-day or 22- to 42-day risk window vs the 43- to 90-day control window (incidence rate ratio [IRR] range, 0.72-1.12). Among the 4596 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after concomitant administration of either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine plus a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine, there was a statistically significant association between vaccination and nonhemorrhagic stroke during the 22- to 42-day risk window for the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2; WT/OMI BA.4/BA.5 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (IRR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.01-1.42]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 3.13 [95% CI, 0.05-6.22]) and a statistically significant association between vaccination and transient ischemic attack during the 1- to 21-day risk window for the Moderna mRNA-1273.222 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (IRR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.06-1.74]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 3.33 [95% CI, 0.46-6.20]). Among the 21 345 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after administration of a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine, there was a statistically significant association between vaccination and nonhemorrhagic stroke during the 22- to 42-day risk window (IRR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.17]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 1.65 [95% CI, 0.43-2.87]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, there was no evidence of a significantly elevated risk for stroke during the days immediately after vaccination.

Lessons From an Implementation Evaluation of a Real-World Multi-City Initiative to Address COVID-19 Vaccination Inequities.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic shed light on stark racial and ethnic inequities in access to care and accurate health information in the U.S. When COVID-19 vaccines became available, communities of color faced multiple barriers that contributed to low vaccine rates. To address this gap, the Equity-First Vaccination Initiative supported community organizations in five demonstration cities to plan and implement hyper-local strategies to increase COVID-19 vaccine access and uptake among communities of color.Purpose: To draw learnings from the experiences of the participating organizations, we applied a framework that integrated implementation science and health equity principles.Design and sample: In this commentary, we describe how we used this framework to guide qualitative interviews with community organizations, focusing on insights across five implementation elements (reach, design, implementation, adaptation, implementation outcomes).Conclusions: Learnings from this evaluation may help guide future implementation of similarly complex initiatives involving multiple organizations and sites to advance health equity during a public health crisis.

The Relationship of Vaccine Uptake and COVID-19 Infections Among Nursing Home Staff and Residents in Missouri: A Measure of Risk by Community Mobility.

BACKGROUND: As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed across the United States, older adults living in nursing home (NH) facilities were disproportionately affected because of living in communal spaces with close proximity to others, age-related medical conditions, and constant contact with staff who may support multiple clients and facilities. While these populations are particularly at risk, there has been limited research focused on the management of the potential vectors of COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) COVID-19 reporting system assessing weekly observations of COVID-19 case counts among NH residents and COVID-19 vaccination rates among NH staff and residents in the states of Missouri and Illinois (n = 877) from May 24, 2021, to August 28, 2021, were used. This ecological study, using results from the CMS COVID-19 reporting system, local COVID-19 rates, and NH-level demographic characteristics, conducted a zero inflation mode to determine the association between NH staff vaccine uptake and COVID-19 cases among NH residents. RESULTS: Among the total 11 195 weekly observations within the NH facilities, zero cases of COVID-19 were reported during 10 683 (95%) of those weeks, supporting the use of a zero-inflated model. Results show that staff vaccination rates were significantly associated with a decrease in COVID-19 mortality. This study identified that for every percentage increase in staff vaccine coverage, the rate of COVID-19 among residents decreased by 2%. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that NH staff vaccination rates are significantly associated with the rate of COVID-19 outbreaks among NH residents. Community median income was associated with an increased likelihood of infection. Future research that explores associations with employment benefits and staff mobility, particularly in vulnerable populations, should be implemented in future vaccination strategic planning.

Perceptions of the COVID-19 Vaccine and Other Adult Vaccinations in Malawi: A Qualitative Assessment.

In Malawi, various brands of the COVID-19 vaccine have been offered to the population, but factors including fear of side effects or other risks, uncertainty about benefits, and misinformation created hesitancy toward them. In early 2022, 4% of Malawians were fully vaccinated for COVID-19. Despite multiple promotion efforts, by August 2022, COVID-19 vaccination nationwide was around 15%. To increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake, the research team collected qualitative data in 4 districts with vaccine coverage levels ranging from 1% to 11%. This data collection happened during a cholera outbreak that began in March 2022 and the vaccination efforts to address it. Study participants included male and female members of the general population, social workers, people with comorbidities, health workers, and community leaders (224 participants total, 47% female). In focus group discussions (n=27) and in-depth interviews (n=17), participants compared COVID-19 vaccines with other adult vaccines, such as cholera and tetanus toxoid. A thematic analysis identified themes related to 3 research questions on COVID-19 vaccine concerns, confidence, and delivery affecting uptake. Differences in promotion, delivery (oral versus injection), COVID-19 vaccine card structure, the various brands and boosters, and vaccines being described as required or optional all played a role in distinguishing COVID-19 vaccines from other vaccines and creating suspicion or indifference. Barriers to vaccination in general, such as rumors or knowledge gaps, were amplified by how novel the COVID-19 vaccines were perceived to be and the changing guidance provided over time. By April 2023, more targeted campaign efforts helped increase vaccination rates to 28%. The findings contribute information about how individuals conceptualize and make decisions about adult vaccination, which can, in turn, inform strategies to integrate COVID-19 promotion and delivery with other disease responses in Malawi as well as routine health services in similar settings.

Cost-Utility Model of Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir in Brazil: Analysis of a Vaccinated Population.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to conduct a cost-utility analysis of the use of the antiviral nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, applied to a vaccinated Brazilian population against COVID-19, from the perspective of the Brazilian Public Health System (SUS). METHODS: A microsimulation model was created with individual-level data and daily cycles, with a 1-year time horizon, to compare the current scenario of standard care with a scenario in which nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is offered to the population. Adults of any age group that received ≥2 doses of the COVID-19 vaccine formed the investigated population. Direct medical costs of the outpatients and inpatients admitted to the ward or intensive care unit were included. The effectiveness of the model was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: In all simulations, the use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir resulted in incremental costs per patient of US dollar (USD)245.86 and incremental effectiveness of 0.009 QALY, over a year. The incremental cost-utility ratio was USD27 220.70/QALY. The relative risk of the vaccinated population was the factor that affected the outcome most, according to the univariate sensitivity analysis. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis resulted in 100% of the simulations being more costly and effective, but that only 4% of them were below the established cost-effectiveness threshold of USD24 000.00/QALY. In the scenario considering only the population over 60 years old and immunosuppressed (of any age), the incremental cost-utility ratio was USD7589.37/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: The use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19 in a vaccinated population was cost-effective only for immunosuppressed individuals and people over 60 years of age.

Continuity of Trust: Health Systems' Role in Advancing Health Equity Beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Given COVID-19's disproportionate impact on populations that identify as Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) in the United States, researchers and advocates have recommended that health systems and institutions deepen their engagement with community-based organizations (CBOs) with longstanding relationships with these communities. However, even as CBOs leverage their earned trust to promote COVID-19 vaccination, health systems and institutions must also address underlying causes of health inequities more broadly. In this commentary, we discuss key lessons learned about trust from our participation in the U.S. Equity-First Vaccination Initiative, an effort funded by The Rockefeller Foundation to promote COVID-19 vaccination equity. The first lesson is that trust cannot be "surged" to meet the needs of the moment until it is no longer deemed important; rather, it must predate and outlast the crisis. Second, to generate long-term change, health systems cannot simply rely on CBOs to bridge the trust gap; instead, they must directly address the root causes of this gap among BIPOC populations.

A pilot recruitment strategy to enhance ethical and equitable access to Covid-19 pediatric vaccine trials.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic disproportionately impacted communities with lower access to health care in the United States, particularly before vaccines were widely available. These same communities are often underrepresented in clinical trials. Efforts to ensure equitable enrollment of participants in trials related to treatment and prevention of Covid-19 can raise concerns about exploitation if communities with lower access to health care are targeted for recruitment. METHODS: To enhance equity while avoiding exploitation, our site developed and implemented a three-part recruitment strategy for pediatric Covid-19 vaccine studies. First, we publicized a registry for potentially interested participants. Next, we applied public health community and social vulnerability indices to categorize the residence of families who had signed up for the registry into three levels to reflect the relative impact of the pandemic on their community: high, medium, and low. Finally, we preferentially offered study participation to interested families living in areas categorized by these indices as having high impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on their community. RESULTS: This approach allowed us to meet goals for study recruitment based on public health metrics related to disease burden, which contributed to a racially diverse study population that mirrored the surrounding community demographics. While this three-part recruitment strategy improved representation of minoritized groups from areas heavily impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic, important limitations were identified that would benefit from further study. CONCLUSION: Future use of this approach to enhance equitable access to research while avoiding exploitation should test different methods to build trust and communicate with underserved communities more effectively.

Assessment of willingness and determinants to receive the COVID-19 vaccine among the general population of the Somali region, Eastern Ethiopia: a 2021 cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: This research aimed to assess COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and the factors influencing it among the population of the Somali region in Ethiopia through a cross-sectional COVID-19 survey. DESIGN: Community-based cross-sectional study. SETTING: The survey was conducted in eight selected districts of the Somali region in Ethiopia from 20 October 2021 to 30 October 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were chosen using simple random sampling and data analysis used Stata V.14. Both bivariable and multivariable binary logistic regression methods were applied, with variables having a p value below 0.2 considered for inclusion in the final model, where statistically significant factors were identified at p<0.5. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Willingness to take the vaccine. RESULTS: A total of 1010 respondents participated in this study. The proportion of people's willingness to take the vaccine was 65% (95% CI 62 to 68). When you believe moderately or highly that getting a COVID-19 vaccine will protect others (AOR=6.2, 95% CI 1.43 to 26.6) and (AOR=7.2, 95% CI 1.7 to 29.7), then you will protect others as well. Whereas, a desire to get vaccinated little, moderately and highly (AOR=4.3, 95% CI 1.77 to 10.4), (AOR=20, 95% CI 8.5 to 47) and (AOR=147, 95% CI 55 to 392), respectively, was significantly associated with willingness to take the vaccine. Moreover having close family and friends who want them to get a COVID-19 vaccine (AOR=2, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.57) and religious leaders or community leaders (AOR=1.8, 95% CI 1 to 3.1) were significant factors in the multivariable logistic regression model. CONCLUSION: This study found that COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was low in the Somali region. Factors positively linked to one's willingness to get vaccinated included the belief that it protects others, personal desire for vaccination and support from family, friends, community and religious leaders.

Financial incentives for COVID-19 vaccines in a rural low-resource setting: a cluster-randomized trial.

We implemented a clustered randomized controlled trial with 6,963 residents in six rural Ghana districts to estimate the causal impact of financial incentives on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination uptake. Villages randomly received one of four video treatment arms: a placebo, a standard health message, a high cash incentive (60 Ghana cedis) and a low cash incentive (20 Ghana cedis). For the first co-primary outcome-COVID-19 vaccination intentions-non-vaccinated participants assigned to the cash incentive treatments had an average rate of 81% (1,733 of 2,168) compared to 71% (1,895 of 2,669) for those in the placebo treatment arm. For the other co-primary outcome of self-reported vaccinations 2 months after the initial intervention, the average rate for participants in the cash treatment was 3.5% higher than for participants in the placebo treatment (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.001, 6.9; P = 0.045): 40% (602 of 1,486) versus 36.3% (672 of 1,850). We also verified vaccination status of participants: in the cash treatment arm, 36.6% (355 of 1,058) of verified participants had at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine compared to 30.3% (439 of 1,544) for those in the placebo-a difference of 6.3% (95% CI: 2.4, 10.2; P = 0.001). For the intention and the vaccination outcomes, the low cash incentive (20 Ghana cedis) had a larger positive effect on COVID-19 vaccine uptake than the high cash incentive (60 Ghana cedis). Trial identifier: AEARCTR-0008775 .

Assessment of hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccine in patients with rheumatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 in 2019 has greatly impacted global health, leading to high morbidity and mortality rates. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients have faced numerous challenges during the pandemic, including concerns about infection, limited medical resources, and shortages of medication. While vaccination is a crucial strategy against COVID-19, the reasons behind vaccine hesitancy (VH) among people with RA remain largely unexplored. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, single-arm study in China from July 18 to August 18, 2021. Using a self-administered questionnaire and a convenient sampling method, we investigated vaccine attitudes and VH among RA patients. The questionnaire developed by the investigators was validated by two public health experts and one senior rheumatologist. It covered sociodemographics, disease-related variables, vaccination attitudes, and willingness, etc. We employed Chi-squared and regression analyses to identify factors associated with VH toward COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: A total of 184 RA patients were enrolled in the survey, with 113 (61.41%) expressing unwillingness to be vaccinated. The Chi-squared test revealed significant differences in employment status and related systemic damage (p < 0.05). Among the unvaccinated RA patients, 71.68% believed COVID-19 vaccination might impact their disease. Binary and multicollinearity logistic regression analyses showed that the acute stage of RA (p < 0.001, OR = -3.165, 95% CI: 0.035 - 0.164) and fear of disease development caused by drug discontinuation during vaccination (p < 0.001, OR = -3.591, 95% CI: 0.005 - 0.157) were the restricting factors influencing the COVID-19 vaccine inoculation rate in RA patients. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 vaccination rate among RA patients in China is low due to limited knowledge, misconceptions, and insufficient promotion. Boosting confidence and understanding of the vaccine's effectiveness and safety is crucial to improve vaccination success.

Challenges in the Management of Children and Adolescents With Epilepsy in China During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Online Survey-Based Study.

INTRODUCTION: To investigate the challenges in the management of children and adolescents with epilepsy in China during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among 845 patients with epilepsy using an online-based questionnaire. The questionnaire focused on sociodemographic characteristics, epilepsy-related conditions, health care access, COVID-19 vaccination, and the mental health of caregivers. Depression was assessed using Patient Health Questionnaire-9. RESULTS: During the pandemic, 24.73% of the patients had increased seizures. The majority of patients (68.89%) experienced difficulty obtaining antiseizure medications. In addition, 94.79% of the patients had difficulty consulting a doctor. A total of 52.78% of the patients selected telemedicine services, and most found these services to be helpful. Moreover, 76.11% of the patients failed to complete the COVID-19 vaccination. More than half of the caregivers had anxiety and depressive symptoms. The risk factors for depression comprised irregularity in taking antiseizure medications, difficulty in obtaining antiseizure medications, and failure to consult a doctor on time. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic presented a great challenge in the management of children and adolescents with epilepsy in China. The findings highlight the importance of improving health care systems and medication management and the mental health of their caregivers.

Social inequalities and the early provision and dispersal of COVID-19 vaccinations in the United States: A population trends study.

BACKGROUND: In December 2020 the U.S. began a massive COVID-19 vaccination campaign, an action that researchers felt could catalyze inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination utilization. While vaccines have the potential to be accessible regardless of social status, the objective of this study was to examine how and when socioeconomic status (SES) and racial/ethnic inequalities would emerge in vaccination distribution. METHODS: Population vaccination rates reported at the county level by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention across 46 states on 3/30/2021. Correlates included SES, the share of the population who were Black, Hispanic, Female, or aged ≥65 years, and urbanicity (thousands of residents per square mile). Multivariable-adjusted analyses relied on zero-inflated negative binomial regression to estimate the odds of providing any vaccine, and vaccination rate ratios (aVRR) comparing the distribution rate for vaccinations across the U.S. RESULTS: Across the U.S., 16.3 % of adults and 37.9 % of adults aged 65 and older were vaccinated in lower SES counties, while 20.45 % of all adults and 48.15 % of adults aged 65 and older were vaccinated in higher SES counties. Inequalities emerged after 41 days, when < 2 % of Americans were vaccinated. Multivariable-adjusted analyses revealed that higher SES was associated with improved vaccination distribution (aVRR = 1.127, [1.100-1.155], p < 1E-06), while increases in the percent reporting Black or Hispanic race/ethnicity was associated with lower vaccination distribution (aVRR = 0.998, [0.996-0.999], p = 1.03E-04). CONCLUSIONS: Social inequalities in COVID-19 vaccines reflect an inefficient and inequitable distribution of these technologies. Future efforts to improve health should recognize the central role of social factors in impacting vaccine delivery.

Social justice in medical education: a student-led approach to addressing COVID-19 vaccine equity in the Hispanic/Latinx community.

The current healthcare system disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, leading to disparities in health outcomes. As a result, medical schools need to equip future physicians with the tools to identify and address healthcare disparities. The University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine implemented a Scholarly Concentration in Medical Social Justice (SCiMSJ) program to address this issue. Three medical students joined the program and pioneered a project to address the equitable vaccine distribution within the local Hispanic/Latinx community. After identifying the disparity in vaccine uptake and high levels of vaccine hesitancy, they collaborated with local organizations to address vaccine misinformation and accessibility. They organized outreach events, provided vaccine education, and hosted a vaccine clinic at a Catholic church with a high Hispanic/Latinx congregation. Through their efforts, they administered 1,456 vaccines. The estimated economic and societal impacts of their work was 879 COVID-19 cases avoided, 5 deaths avoided, 45 life years saved, and $29,286 in economic value. The project's success highlights the effectiveness of a student-led approach to promote skill development in social justice training. Leadership skills and coalition building were crucial in overcoming resource limitations and connecting organizations with the necessary volunteer force. Building trust with the Hispanic/Latinx community through outreach efforts and addressing vaccine hesitancy contributed to the well-attended vaccine clinic. The project's framework and approach can be adopted by other medical students and organizations to address health disparities and improve health outcomes in their communities.

COVID-19 Communication Campaigns for Vaccination: An Assessment with Perspectives for Future Equity-Centered Public Health Efforts.

Although public and private institutions have spent billions of dollars on COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, many of which claim to be "equity-focused," few articles to date have objectively described the landscape of these campaigns or identified existing gaps with a focus on those populations disproportionately impacted by the virus. To these ends, a high-level landscape analysis of COVID-related communication campaigns was conducted. Analysis of 15 COVID-related communication campaigns based on six criteria (i.e., understandability, accessibility, actionability, credibility/trustworthiness, relevance/relatability, and timeliness) identified successful efforts, including campaigns aligned with the World Health Organization's Strategic Communications Framework and rooted in community co-design and communication science. The analysis also revealed five common shortcomings: campaigns were not end-user focused, only "checked the box" when communicating with historically under-resourced communities, were largely broadcast-focused and rarely involved two-way engagement strategies or tactics, demonstrated poor use of online communication approaches and failed to moderate campaign comment boards/social media sites, and commonly targeted "intermediary" audiences with materials that were not "end user ready." Based on these findings, the authors offer recommendations to guide funding and development of future health communication campaigns focused on reaching diverse audiences.