Public attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccine mandates and vaccine certificates in Canada: a time series study.

INTRODUCTION: Since the beginning of the pandemic, numerous public health measures such as COVID-19 vaccines, vaccine mandates and vaccination certificates have been introduced to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. Public opinion and attitudes towards these measures have fluctuated in response to the dynamic political, social, and cultural landscape of the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a time-series study consisting of national cross-sectional surveys between November 2021 to March 2022 to evaluate the Canadian public's attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccine mandates and vaccine certificates. RESULTS: When examining public sentiment towards COVID-19 vaccine certificates and proof of vaccination measures, there was a shift in responses over time. The proportion of participants "strongly supporting" these measures decreased from 66.0 to 43.1% between W25(Capacity Limits), -W32 (Mask Mandate Removed), whereas "strongly oppose" was the second most common response and rose from 15.9 to 20.6% during this same time period. Concurrently, when examining participants views surrounding mandates, many participants believed that their province was reopening at "about the right pace", which remained relatively stable over time (33.0-35.4%) between W28 (Emergency Act)-W32 (Mask Mandate Removed). CONCLUSION: Our study's findings on the public's attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccine mandates and vaccine certificates in Canada may aid to guide and streamline the implementation of future similar public health interventions. Future research should include extended follow-up and a more comprehensive examination of trust in government institutions and polarized perspectives on vaccine mandates.

A scoping review of active, participant centred, digital adverse events following immunization (AEFI) surveillance of WHO approved COVID-19 vaccines: A Canadian immunization Research Network study.

This scoping review examines the role of digital solutions in active, participant-centered surveillance of adverse events following initial release of COVID-19 vaccines. The goals of this paper were to examine the existing literature surrounding digital solutions and technology used for active, participant centered, AEFI surveillance of novel COVID-19 vaccines approved by WHO. This paper also aimed to identify gaps in literature surrounding digital, active, participant centered AEFI surveillance systems and to identify and describe the core components of active, participant centered, digital surveillance systems being used for post-market AEFI surveillance of WHO approved COVID-19 vaccines, with a focus on the digital solutions and technology being used, the type of AEFI detected, and the populations under surveillance. The findings highlight the need for customized surveillance systems based on local contexts and the lessons learned to improve future vaccine monitoring and pandemic preparedness.

Assessing the quality and value of metabolic chart data for capturing core outcomes for pediatric medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase (MCAD) deficiency.

BACKGROUND: Generating rigorous evidence to inform care for rare diseases requires reliable, sustainable, and longitudinal measurement of priority outcomes. Having developed a core outcome set for pediatric medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase (MCAD) deficiency, we aimed to assess the feasibility of prospective measurement of these core outcomes during routine metabolic clinic visits. METHODS: We used existing cohort data abstracted from charts of 124 children diagnosed with MCAD deficiency who participated in a Canadian study which collected data from birth to a maximum of 11 years of age to investigate the frequency of clinic visits and quality of metabolic chart data for selected outcomes. We recorded all opportunities to collect outcomes from the medical chart as a function of visit rate to the metabolic clinic, by treatment centre and by child age. We applied a data quality framework to evaluate data based on completeness, conformance, and plausibility for four core MCAD outcomes: emergency department use, fasting time, metabolic decompensation, and death. RESULTS: The frequency of metabolic clinic visits decreased with increasing age, from a rate of 2.8 visits per child per year (95% confidence interval, 2.3-3.3) among infants 2 to 6 months, to 1.0 visit per child per year (95% confidence interval, 0.9-1.2) among those ≥ 5 years of age. Rates of emergency department visits followed anticipated trends by child age. Supplemental findings suggested that some emergency visits occur outside of the metabolic care treatment centre but are not captured. Recommended fasting times were updated relatively infrequently in patients' metabolic charts. Episodes of metabolic decompensation were identifiable but required an operational definition based on acute manifestations most commonly recorded in the metabolic chart. Deaths occurred rarely in these patients and quality of mortality data was not evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Opportunities to record core outcomes at the metabolic clinic occur at least annually for children with MCAD deficiency. Methods to comprehensively capture emergency care received at outside institutions are needed. To reduce substantial heterogeneous recording of core outcome across treatment centres, improved documentation standards are required for recording of recommended fasting times and a consensus definition for metabolic decompensations needs to be developed and implemented.

Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 Monovalent and Bivalent Vaccine Booster Doses Against Omicron Severe Outcomes Among Adults Aged ≥50 Years in Ontario, Canada: A Canadian Immunization Research Network Study.

We estimated the effectiveness of booster doses of monovalent and bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against Omicron-associated severe outcomes among adults aged ≥50 years in Ontario, Canada. Monovalent and bivalent mRNA COVID-19 booster doses provided similar strong initial protection against severe outcomes. Uncertainty remains around waning of protection from these vaccines.

Protection conferred by COVID-19 vaccination, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, or hybrid immunity against Omicron-associated severe outcomes among community-dwelling adults.

INTRODUCTION: We assessed protection from COVID-19 vaccines and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection against Omicron-associated severe outcomes during successive sublineage-predominant periods. METHODS: We used a test-negative design to estimate protection by vaccines and/or prior infection against hospitalization/death among community-dwelling, PCR-tested adults aged ≥50 years in Ontario, Canada between January 2, 2022 and June 30, 2023. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the relative change in the odds of hospitalization/death with each vaccine dose (2-5) and/or prior PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (compared with unvaccinated, uninfected subjects) up to 15 months since the last vaccination or infection. RESULTS: We included 18,526 cases with Omicron-associated severe outcomes and 90,778 test-negative controls. Vaccine protection was high during BA.1/BA.2 predominance, but was generally <50% during periods of BA.4/BA.5 and BQ/XBB predominance without boosters. A third/fourth dose transiently increased protection during BA.4/BA.5 predominance (third-dose, 6-month: 68%, 95%CI 63%-72%; fourth-dose, 6-month: 80%, 95%CI 77%-83%), but was lower and waned quickly during BQ/XBB predominance (third-dose, 6-month: 59%, 95%CI 48%-67%; 12-month: 49%, 95%CI 41%-56%; fourth-dose, 6-month: 62%, 95%CI 56%-68%, 12-months: 51%, 95%CI 41%-56%). Hybrid immunity conferred nearly 90% protection throughout BA.1/BA.2 and BA.4/BA.5 predominance, but was reduced during BQ/XBB predominance (third-dose, 6-month: 60%, 95%CI 36%-75%; fourth-dose, 6-month: 63%, 95%CI 42%-76%). Protection was restored with a fifth dose (bivalent; 6-month: 91%, 95%CI 79%-96%). Prior infection alone did not confer lasting protection. CONCLUSION: Protection from COVID-19 vaccines and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infections against severe outcomes is reduced when immune-evasive variants/subvariants emerge and may also wane over time. Our findings support a variant-adapted booster vaccination strategy with periodic review.

Effectiveness of maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy against laboratory-confirmed seasonal influenza among infants under 6 months of age in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials conducted in low- and middle-income settings demonstrated efficacy of influenza vaccination during pregnancy against influenza infection among infants <6 months of age. However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates from settings with different population characteristics and influenza seasonality remain limited. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative study in Ontario, Canada. All influenza virus tests among infants <6 months from 2010-2019 were identified and linked with health databases to ascertain information on maternal-infant dyads. VE was estimated from the odds ratio for influenza vaccination during pregnancy among cases versus controls, computed using logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders. RESULTS: Among 23,806 infants tested for influenza, 1,783 (7.5%) were positive and 1,708 (7.2%) were born to mothers vaccinated against influenza during pregnancy. VE against laboratory-confirmed infant influenza infection was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 50%-74%). VE was similar by trimester of vaccination (1st/2nd: 66%, 40%-80%; 3rd: 63%, 46%-74%), infant age at testing (0-<2 months: 63%, 46%-75%; 2-<6 months: 64%, 36%-79%), and gestational age at birth (≥37 weeks: 64%, 50%-75%; < 37 weeks: 61%, 4%-86%). VE against influenza hospitalization was 67% (95%CI: 50%-78%). CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination during pregnancy offers effective protection to infants <6 months, for whom vaccines are not currently available.

Newborn and Early Infant Outcomes Following Maternal COVID-19 Vaccination During Pregnancy.

Importance: The study team previously showed that maternal mRNA COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy confers protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospital admission in newborns and young infants. In this study, the study team evaluated newborn and early infant safety outcomes following maternal messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, for which there is limited comparative epidemiological evidence. Objective: To determine if maternal mRNA COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy is associated with adverse newborn and early infant outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based retrospective cohort study took place in Ontario, Canada, using multiple linked health administrative databases. Singleton live births with an expected delivery date between May 1, 2021, and September 2, 2022, were included. Data were analyzed from January 2023 through March 2023. Exposure: Maternal mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (1 or more doses) during pregnancy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Severe neonatal morbidity (SNM), neonatal death, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, neonatal readmission, and hospital admission up to 6 months of age. The study team calculated inverse probability of treatment weighted risk ratios (RRs) and fit weighted Cox proportional hazards regression models comparing outcomes in infants of mothers who received COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy with those who received no COVID-19 vaccine doses before delivery. Results: In total, 142 006 infants (72 595 male [51%]; mean [SD] gestational age at birth, 38.7 [1.7] weeks) were included; 85 670 were exposed to 1 or more COVID-19 vaccine doses in utero (60%). Infants of vaccinated mothers had lower risks of SNM (vaccine exposed 7.3% vs vaccine unexposed 8.3%; adjusted RR [aRR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.90), neonatal death (0.09% vs 0.16%; aRR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.65), and NICU admission (11.4% vs 13.1%; aRR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.89). There was no association between maternal vaccination during pregnancy and neonatal readmission (5.5% vs 5.1%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.98-1.09) or 6-month hospital admission (8.4% vs 8.1%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.96-1.05). Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada, maternal mRNA COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy was associated with lower risks of SNM, neonatal death, and NICU admission. In addition, neonatal and 6-month readmissions were not increased in infants of mothers vaccinated during pregnancy.

Proof-of-vaccination credentials for COVID-19 and considerations for future use of digital proof-of-immunization technologies: Results of an expert consultation.

Objective: As part of COVID-19 pandemic control efforts, digital proof-of-vaccination credentials were launched in Canada in 2021-2022 following widespread vaccine availability. Given the controversy over proof-of-vaccination credentials-often colloquially called vaccine or immunization "passports"-it is imperative to document successes, shortcomings, and recommendations for any future uses. Methods: This expert consultation applied inductive qualitative content analysis to online video interviews with key informants whose expertise ranged from ethics to public health to computer science to identify what we can learn from this experience with proof-of-vaccination credentials, and what decision-makers must keep in mind for possible future use of such technologies. Results: There remains a lack of consensus regarding appropriate language and scope for digital proof-of-vaccination technologies, the respective roles of the technology sector versus government in design and implementation, and parameters for future use. However, experts agree on many recommendations, including the importance of clear communication, evidence-based rationale for the use of proof-of-vaccination credentials, multidisciplinary consultation including academic experts and the public, and the importance of pan-Canadian standards for accessibility and interoperability. Identified risks of use that emerged, and should be minimized in the future, include risks of coercion and backlash; threats to access, equity and privacy; and impacts such as costs of the technology and workload burden of enforcement and fraud detection. Conclusions: There is much to learn from this first major use of digital proof-of-vaccination credentials. A full scientific review of the impacts on health and equity should be combined with expert recommendations to create pan-Canadian guidelines for the future use of digital proof-of-vaccination solutions.

The barriers, facilitators and association of vaccine certificates on COVID-19 vaccine uptake: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Globally, COVID-19 vaccines have proven to be instrumental for promoting population health by reducing illness from SARS-CoV-2. Vaccine certificates emerged as a potentially promising solution for encouraging vaccination and facilitating the safe reopening of society, however, they were controversial due to criticisms of infringing upon individual rights. While there is extensive literature describing the ethical, legal, and public health implications of vaccine certificates, there is currently a gap in knowledge about the association of vaccine certificates on vaccine uptake during the COVID-19 pandemic and barriers and facilitators to their use. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this scoping review are to (i) describe the existing literature on the association of vaccine certificates on the rates of COVID-19 vaccine uptake across several countries and (ii) describe the intrinsic and extrinsic barriers or facilitators that moderate this relationship. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review based on PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRSIMA-ScR) guidelines. We searched three bibliographic databases (APA PsychInfo, Embase Classic + Embase, OVID-Medline) and preprint severs during the first week of July 2023. Three reviewers independently screened the studies based on pre-specified eligibility criteria and performed quality assessments of the primary literature and data extraction. RESULTS: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. 14 or these were surveys and 2 were modelling studies. The majority documented that vaccine certificates were significantly associated with increased rates of COVID-19 vaccine uptake (n = 12), motivated by factors such as travel/employer requirements, influence from the government/peers, and trust in the safety, efficacy, and science behind COVID-19 vaccines. Three studies had non-significant or mixed findings. Only one study found a significant decrease in COVID-19 vaccine uptake, motivated by pervasive distrust in the QR code-based system of digital vaccine certificates in Russia. Quality of survey studies was generally high. CONCLUSION: Our findings provide insights into the existing literature on vaccine certificates association with vaccine uptake in several different jurisdictions and barriers and facilitators to their uptake. This information can be used to guide future examinations of the implementation of vaccine certificates and more effective implementations.

Dietary supplements to reduce symptom severity and duration in people with SARS-CoV-2: a double-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has caused morbidity, hospitalisation and mortality worldwide. Despite effective vaccines, there is still a need for effective treatments, especially for people in the community. Dietary supplements have long been used to treat respiratory infections, and preliminary evidence indicates some may be effective in people with COVID-19. We sought to evaluate whether a combination of vitamin C, vitamin D3, vitamin K2 and zinc could improve overall health and decrease symptom burden in outpatients diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: Participants were randomised to receive either vitamin C (6 g), vitamin D3 (1000 units), vitamin K2 (240 µg) and zinc acetate (75 mg) or placebo daily for 21 days and were followed for 12 weeks. An additional loading dose of 50 000 units vitamin D3 (or placebo) was given on day one. The primary outcome was participant-reported overall health using the EuroQol Visual Assessment Scale summed over 21 days. Secondary outcomes included health status, symptom severity, symptom duration, delayed return to usual health, frequency of hospitalisation and mortality. RESULTS: 90 patients (46 control, 44 treatment) were randomised. The study was stopped prematurely due to insufficient capacity for recruitment. The mean difference (control-treatment) in cumulative overall health was -37.4 (95% CI -157.2 to 82.3), p=0.53 on a scale of 0-2100. No clinically or statistically significant differences were seen in any secondary outcomes. INTERPRETATION: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of outpatients diagnosed with COVID-19, the dietary supplements vitamin C, vitamin D3, vitamin K2 and zinc acetate showed no clinically or statistically significant effects on the documented measures of health compared with a placebo when given for 21 days. Termination due to feasibility limited our ability to demonstrate the efficacy of these supplements for COVID-19. Further research is needed to determine clinical utility. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04780061.

Protocol for a living evidence synthesis on variants of concern and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: It is evident that COVID-19 will remain a public health concern in the coming years, largely driven by variants of concern (VOC). It is critical to continuously monitor vaccine effectiveness as new variants emerge and new vaccines and/or boosters are developed. Systematic surveillance of the scientific evidence base is necessary to inform public health action and identify key uncertainties. Evidence syntheses may also be used to populate models to fill in research gaps and help to prepare for future public health crises. This protocol outlines the rationale and methods for a living evidence synthesis of the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in reducing the morbidity and mortality associated with, and transmission of, VOC of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Living evidence syntheses of vaccine effectiveness will be carried out over one year for (1) a range of potential outcomes in the index individual associated with VOC (pathogenesis); and (2) transmission of VOC. The literature search will be conducted up to May 2023. Observational and database-linkage primary studies will be included, as well as RCTs. Information sources include electronic databases (MEDLINE; Embase; Cochrane, L*OVE; the CNKI and Wangfang platforms), pre-print servers (medRxiv, BiorXiv), and online repositories of grey literature. Title and abstract and full-text screening will be performed by two reviewers using a liberal accelerated method. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be completed by one reviewer with verification of the assessment by a second reviewer. Results from included studies will be pooled via random effects meta-analysis when appropriate, or otherwise summarized narratively. DISCUSSION: Evidence generated from our living evidence synthesis will be used to inform policy making, modelling, and prioritization of future research on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against VOC.

Exploring COVID-19 education to support vaccine confidence amongst the general adult population with special considerations for healthcare and long-term care staff: A scoping review.

Background: Despite the demonstrated efficacy of approved COVID-19 vaccines, high levels of hesitancy were observed in the first few months of the COVID-19 vaccines' rollout. Factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy are well-described in the literature. Among the various strategies for promoting vaccine confidence, educational interventions provide a foundationally and widely implemented set of approaches for supporting individuals in their vaccine decisions. However, the evidence around the measurable impact of various educational strategies to improve vaccine confidence is limited. We conducted a scoping review with the aim of exploring and characterizing educational interventions delivered during the pandemic to support COVID-19 vaccine confidence in adults. Methods: We developed a search strategy with a medical information scientist and searched five databases, including Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science, as well as grey literature. We considered all study designs and reports. Interventions delivered to children or adolescents, interventions on non-COVID-19 vaccines, as well as national or mass vaccination campaigns without documented interaction(s) between facilitator(s) and a specific audience were excluded. Articles were independently screened by three reviewers. After screening 4602 titles and abstracts and 174 full-text articles across two rounds of searches, 22 articles met our inclusion criteria. Ten additional studies were identified through hand searching. Data from included studies were charted and results were described narratively. Results: We included 32 studies and synthesized their educational delivery structure, participants (i.e., facilitators and priority audience), and content. Formal, group-based presentations were the most common type of educational intervention in the included studies (75%). A third of studies (34%) used multiple strategies, with many formal group-based presentations being coupled with additional individual-based interventions (29%). Given the novelty of the COVID-19 vaccines and the unique current context, studies reported personalized conversations, question periods, and addressing misinformation as important components of the educational approaches reviewed. Conclusions: Various educational interventions were delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic, with many initiatives involving multifaceted interventions utilizing both formal and informal approaches that leveraged community (cultural, religious) partnerships when developing and facilitating COVID-19 vaccine education. Train-the-trainer approaches with recognized community members could be of value as trust and personal connections were identified as strong enablers throughout the review.

Myocarditis and Pericarditis Post-mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination: Insights from a Pharmacovigilance Perspective.

Concerns remain regarding the rare cardiovascular adverse events, myocarditis and pericarditis (myo/pericarditis), particularly in younger individuals following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Our study aimed to comprehensively assess potential safety signals related to these cardiac events following the primary and booster doses, with a specific focus on younger populations, including children as young as 6 months of age. Using the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), the United States national passive surveillance system, we conducted a retrospective pharmacovigilance study analyzing spontaneous reports of myo/pericarditis. We employed both frequentist and Bayesian methods and conducted subgroup analyses by age, sex, and vaccine dose. We observed a higher reporting rate of myo/pericarditis following the primary vaccine series, particularly in males and mainly after the second dose. However, booster doses demonstrated a lower number of reported cases, with no significant signals detected after the fourth or fifth doses. In children and young adults, we observed notable age and sex differences in the reporting of myo/pericarditis cases. Males in the 12-17 and 18-24-year-old age groups had the highest number of cases, with significant signals for both males and females after the second dose. We also identified an increased reporting for a spectrum of cardiovascular symptoms such as chest pain and dyspnea, which increased with age, and were reported more frequently than myo/pericarditis. The present study identified signals of myo/pericarditis and related cardiovascular symptoms after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, especially among children and adolescents. These findings underline the importance for continued vaccine surveillance and the need for further studies to confirm these results and to determine their clinical implications in public health decision-making, especially for younger populations.

Pregnancy, fetal, and neonatal outcomes after a first booster dose of covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy in Ontario, Canada: population based, retrospective cohort study.

Objective: To assess risk of adverse pregnancy, fetal, and neonatal outcomes after a third dose (first booster dose) of covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy among individuals who had completed both doses of primary covid-19 vaccine series before pregnancy. Design: Population based, retrospective cohort study. Setting: Ontario, Canada, from 20 December 2021 to 31 August 2022. Participants: Individuals were included if they were pregnant with an expected date of delivery from 20 December 2021 (start date of third dose eligibility for everyone ≥18 years) to 31 August 2022, who had completed the two doses of primary covid-19 messenger RNA vaccine series before pregnancy, and became eligible for a third dose (≥six months since dose two) before the end of pregnancy. Main outcome measures: Pregnancy outcomes included hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, placental abruption, caesarean delivery, chorioamnionitis, and postpartum hemorrhage. Fetal and neonatal outcomes included stillbirth, preterm birth, admission to neonatal intensive care unit for >24 h, newborn 5 min Apgar score <7, and small-for-gestational age infant (<10th percentile). We estimated hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for study outcomes, treating dose three as a time varying exposure and adjusting for confounding using inverse probability weighting. Results: Among 32 689 births, 18 491 (56.6%) were born to individuals who received a third covid-19 dose during pregnancy. Compared with eligible individuals who did not receive a third dose during pregnancy, no increased risks were associated with receiving a third covid-19 vaccine dose during pregnancy for placental abruption (adjusted hazard ratio 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.70 to 1.02)), chorioamnionitis (0.67 (0.49 to 0.90)), postpartum haemorrhage (1.01 (0.89 to 1.16)), caesarean delivery (0.90 (0.87 to 0.94)), stillbirth (0.56 (0.39 to 0.81)), preterm birth (0.91 (0.84 to 0.99)), neonatal intensive care unit admission (0.96 (0.90 to 1.03)), 5 min Apgar score<7 (0.96 (0.82 to 1.14)), or small-for-gestational age infant (0.86 (0.79 to 0.93)). Conclusion: Receipt of a third covid-19 vaccine dose during pregnancy was not associated with an increased risk of adverse pregnancy, fetal, or neonatal outcomes. These findings can help to inform evidence based decision making about the risks and benefits of covid-19 booster doses during pregnancy.

Risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in mRNA COVID-19-vaccinated and unvaccinated populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To summarise the available evidence on the risk of myocarditis and/or pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, compared with the risk among unvaccinated individuals in the absence of COVID-19 infection. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science and WHO Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease), preprint repositories (medRxiv and bioRxiv), reference lists and grey literature were searched from 1 December 2020 until 31 October 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Epidemiological studies of individuals of any age who received at least one dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, reported a risk of myo/pericarditis and compared the risk of myo/pericarditis to individuals who did not receive any dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently conducted screening and data extraction. The rate of myo/pericarditis among vaccinated and unvaccinated groups was recorded, and the rate ratios were calculated. Additionally, the total number of individuals, case ascertainment criteria, percentage of males and history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were extracted for each study. Meta-analysis was done using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Seven studies met the inclusion criteria, of which six were included in the quantitative synthesis. Our meta-analysis indicates that within 30-day follow-up period, vaccinated individuals were twice as likely to develop myo/pericarditis in the absence of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to unvaccinated individuals, with a rate ratio of 2.05 (95% CI 1.49-2.82). CONCLUSION: Although the absolute number of observed myo/pericarditis cases remains quite low, a higher risk was detected in those who received mRNA COVID-19 vaccinations compared with unvaccinated individuals in the absence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Given the effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in preventing severe illnesses, hospitalisations and deaths, future research should focus on accurately determining the rates of myo/pericarditis linked to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, understanding the biological mechanisms behind these rare cardiac events and identifying those most at risk.

The influence of sociodemographic factors on COVID-19 vaccine certificate acceptance: A cross-sectional study.

Vaccine certificates have been implemented worldwide, aiming to promote vaccination rates and to reduce the spread of COVID-19. However, their use during the COVID-19 pandemic was controversial and has been criticized for infringing upon medical autonomy and individual rights. We administered a national online survey exploring social and demographic factors predicting the degree of public approval of vaccine certificates in Canada. We conducted a multivariate linear regression which revealed which factors were predictive of vaccine certificate acceptance in Canada. Self-reported minority status (p < .001), rurality (p < .001), political ideology (p < .001), age (p < .001), having children under 18 in the household (p < .001), education (p = .014), and income status (p = .034) were significant predictors of attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine certificates. We observed the lowest vaccine-certificate approval among participants who: self-identify as a visible minority; live in rural areas; are politically conservative; are 18-34 years of age; have children under age 18 living in the household; have completed an apprenticeship or trades education; and those with an annual income between $100,000-$159,999. The present findings are valuable for their ability to inform the implementation of vaccine certificates during future pandemic scenarios which may require targeted communication between public health agencies and under-vaccinated populations.

Comparing the Use of a Mobile App and a Web-Based Notification Platform for Surveillance of Adverse Events Following Influenza Immunization: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine safety surveillance is a core component of vaccine pharmacovigilance. In Canada, active, participant-centered vaccine surveillance is available for influenza vaccines and has been used for COVID-19 vaccines. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of using a mobile app for reporting participant-centered seasonal influenza adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) compared to a web-based notification system. METHODS: Participants were randomized to influenza vaccine safety reporting via a mobile app or a web-based notification platform. All participants were invited to complete a user experience survey. RESULTS: Among the 2408 randomized participants, 1319 (54%) completed their safety survey 1 week after vaccination, with a higher completion rate among the web-based notification platform users (767/1196, 64%) than among mobile app users (552/1212, 45%; P<.001). Ease-of-use ratings were high for the web-based notification platform users (99% strongly agree or agree) and 88.8% of them strongly agreed or agreed that the system made reporting AEFIs easier. Web-based notification platform users supported the statement that a web-based notification-only approach would make it easier for public health professionals to detect vaccine safety signals (91.4%, agreed or strongly agreed). CONCLUSIONS: Participants in this study were significantly more likely to respond to a web-based safety survey rather than within a mobile app. These results suggest that mobile apps present an additional barrier for use compared to the web-based notification-only approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05794113; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT05794113.

Temporal trends and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine series initiation after recent pregnancy.

During the rapid deployment of COVID-19 vaccines in 2021, safety concerns may have led some pregnant individuals to postpone vaccination until after giving birth. This study aimed to describe temporal patterns and factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine series initiation after recent pregnancy in Ontario, Canada. Using the provincial birth registry linked with the COVID-19 vaccine database, we identified all individuals who gave birth between January 1 and December 31, 2021, and had not yet been vaccinated by the end of pregnancy, and followed them to June 30, 2022 (follow-up ranged from 6 to 18 months). We used cumulative incidence curves to describe COVID-19 vaccine initiation after pregnancy and assessed associations with sociodemographic, pregnancy-related, and health behavioral factors using Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Among 137,198 individuals who gave birth in 2021, 87,376 (63.7%) remained unvaccinated at the end of pregnancy; of these, 65.0% initiated COVID-19 vaccination by June 30, 2022. Lower maternal age (<25 vs. 30-34 y aHR: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.70-0.77), smoking during pregnancy (vs. nonsmoking aHR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.65-0.72), lower neighborhood income (lowest quintile vs. highest aHR: 0.79, 95%CI: 0.76-0.83), higher material deprivation (highest quintile vs. lowest aHR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.70-0.79), and exclusive breastfeeding (vs. other feeding aHR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.79-0.84) were associated with lower likelihood of vaccine initiation. Among unvaccinated individuals who gave birth in 2021, COVID-19 vaccine initiation after pregnancy reached 65% by June 30, 2022, suggesting persistent issues with vaccine hesitancy and/or access to vaccination in this population.

Effect of Donor Sex on Recipient Mortality in Transfusion.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting observational evidence exists regarding the association between the sex of red-cell donors and mortality among transfusion recipients. Evidence to inform transfusion practice and policy is limited. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients undergoing red-cell transfusion to receive units of red cells from either male donors or female donors. Patients maintained their trial-group assignment throughout the trial period, including during subsequent inpatient and outpatient encounters. Randomization was conducted in a 60:40 ratio (male donor group to female donor group) to match the historical allocation of red-cell units from the blood supplier. The primary outcome was survival, with the male donor group as the reference group. RESULTS: A total of 8719 patients underwent randomization before undergoing transfusion; 5190 patients were assigned to the male donor group, and 3529 to the female donor group. At baseline, the mean (±SD) age of the enrolled patients was 66.8±16.4 years. The setting of the first transfusion was as an inpatient in 6969 patients (79.9%), of whom 2942 (42.2%) had been admitted under a surgical service. The baseline hemoglobin level before transfusion was 79.5±19.7 g per liter, and patients received a mean of 5.4±10.5 units of red cells in the female donor group and 5.1±8.9 units in the male donor group (difference, 0.3 units; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.1 to 0.7). Over the duration of the trial, 1141 patients in the female donor group and 1712 patients in the male donor group died. In the primary analysis of overall survival, the adjusted hazard ratio for death was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.91 to 1.06). CONCLUSIONS: This trial showed no significant difference in survival between a transfusion strategy involving red-cell units from female donors and a strategy involving red-cell units from male donors. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; iTADS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03344887.).