How inclusive were UK-based randomised controlled trials of COVID-19 vaccines? A systematic review investigating enrolment of Black adults and adult ethnic minorities.

OBJECTIVES: To establish if Black adults and adult ethnic minorities, defined as any group except White British, were represented in UK-based COVID-19 vaccination randomised controlled trials (RCTs) when compared to corresponding UK population proportions, based on 2011 census data. DESIGN: Systematic review of COVID-19 Randomised Controlled Vaccine Trials SETTING: United Kingdom PARTICIPANTS: Randomised Controlled Trials of COVID-19 vaccines conducted in the UK were systematically reviewed following PRISMA guidelines. MeSH terms included "Covid-19 vaccine", "Ad26COVS1", and "BNT162 Vaccine" with keywords such as [covishield OR coronavac OR Vaxzevria OR NVX-CoV2373] also used. Studies that provided (A) participant demographics and (B) full eligibility criteria were included. The following key data was extracted for analysis: number of participants analysed, number of Black adults and number of adult minority ethnicity participants. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome is the mean percentage of Black adults randomised to COVID-19 vaccine trials deemed eligible within this review. The secondary outcome is the mean percentage of adult ethnic minorities randomised. RESULTS: The final review included 7 papers and a total of 87 sets of data collated from trial sites across the UK. The standard mean percentage of Black adults included in the trials (0.59%, 95% CI: 0.13% - 1.05%) was significantly lower compared to the recorded Black adult population (2.67%) indicating that they were under-served in UK based COVID-19 vaccine RCTs (p < 0.001). Adult ethnic minority presence (8.94%, 95% CI: 2.07% - 15.80%) was also lower than census data (16.30%), indicating they were also under-served (p = 0.039). CONCLUSION: The findings show that COVID-19 vaccine trials failed to adequately randomise proportionate numbers of Black adults and adult minority ethnicities. More inclusive practices must be developed and implemented in the recruitment of underserved groups to understand the true impact of COVID-19.

mRNA-LNP vaccine-induced CD8+ T-cells protect mice from lethal SARS-CoV-2 infection in the absence of specific antibodies.

The role of CD8+ T-cells in SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis or mRNA-LNP vaccine-induced protection from lethal COVID-19 is unclear. Using mouse-adapted SARS-CoV-2 virus (MA30) in C57BL/6 mice, we show that CD8+ T-cells are unnecessary for the intrinsic resistance of female or the susceptibility of male mice to lethal SARS-CoV-2 infection. Also, mice immunized with a di-proline prefusion-stabilized full-length SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S-2P) mRNA-LNP vaccine, which induces Spike-specific antibodies and CD8+ T-cells specific for the Spike-derived VNFNFNGL peptide, are protected from SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced lethality and weight loss, while mice vaccinated with mRNA-LNPs encoding only VNFNFNGL are protected from lethality but not weight loss. CD8+ T-cell depletion ablates protection in VNFNFNGL but not in S-2P mRNA-LNP-vaccinated mice. Therefore, mRNA-LNP vaccine-induced CD8+ T-cells are dispensable when protective antibodies are present but essential for survival in their absence. Hence, vaccine-induced CD8+ T-cells may be critical to protect against SARS-CoV-2 variants that mutate epitopes targeted by protective antibodies.

Identifying and overcoming COVID-19 vaccination impediments using Bayesian data mining techniques.

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly reshaped human life. The development of COVID-19 vaccines has offered a semblance of normalcy. However, obstacles to vaccination have led to substantial loss of life and economic burdens. In this study, we analyze data from a prominent health insurance provider in the United States to uncover the underlying reasons behind the inability, refusal, or hesitancy to receive vaccinations. Our research proposes a methodology for pinpointing affected population groups and suggests strategies to mitigate vaccination barriers and hesitations. Furthermore, we estimate potential cost savings resulting from the implementation of these strategies. To achieve our objectives, we employed Bayesian data mining methods to streamline data dimensions and identify significant variables (features) influencing vaccination decisions. Comparative analysis reveals that the Bayesian method outperforms cutting-edge alternatives, demonstrating superior performance.

[Singularities of COVID-19 in immunosuppressed persons]. / Singularités du Covid-19 chez les personnes immunosupprimées.

Immunosuppressed persons are a heterogeneous population that represents approximately 3 % of the adult population. They are more vulnerable to infectious agents, such as SARS-CoV-2. This is reflected by a reduced response to vaccination, a higher rate of progression towards a severe form of the disease, and recurrent or persistent infections associated with intra-host viral evolution. This review summarizes the evidence regarding vaccine efficacy, clinical and virological singularities, and the management in immunosuppressed patients.

Les personnes immunosupprimées (PI) constituent une population hétérogène représentant environ 3 % de la population adulte et sont plus vulnérables aux infections, telles que le Covid-19, face auquel elles présentent une réponse vaccinale diminuée, un taux plus élevé d'évolution vers une forme sévère de la maladie, et des infections persistantes associées à une excrétion virale prolongée et à une possible évolution virale intrahôte. Cet article résume l'évidence concernant l'efficacité vaccinale, les particularités clinico-virologiques et la prise en charge spécifique, dans la population des PI.

Effectiveness of the Sanofi/GSK (VidPrevtyn Beta) and Pfizer-BioNTech (Comirnaty Original/Omicron BA.4-5) bivalent vaccines against hospitalisation in England.

Background: The Sanofi/GSK AS03-adjuvanted (VidPrevtyn Beta) vaccine and the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA (Comirnaty Original/Omicron BA.4-5) bivalent vaccine were offered to adults aged 75 years and over in England from 3rd April 2023. This is the first time an adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccine has been administered as part of a UK COVID-19 vaccination programme. In clinical trials, antibody levels generated were comparable with mRNA vaccines but there are no real-world data on the effectiveness or duration of protection. Methods: We used a test-negative case-control study design to estimate the incremental vaccine effectiveness of the Sanofi/GSK and Pfizer bivalent BA.4-5 boosters against hospitalisation amongst those aged 75 years and older in England. Cases (those testing positive) and controls (those testing negative) were identified from the national COVID-19 PCR testing data undertaken in hospital settings. The study period included tests from 3rd April 2023 to 27th August 2023. Tests were linked to the COVID-19 vaccination register and to the national hospital admission database, restricting to those with an acute respiratory infection coded in the primary diagnosis field. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated using multivariable logistic regression amongst those who had last received an autumn 2022 booster given at least 3 months prior. The test result was the outcome and vaccination status the exposure. Analyses were adjusted for week of test, gender, age, clinical risk group status, care home resident status, region, index of multiple deprivation, ethnicity, influenza vaccination status and recent COVID-19 positivity. Findings: There were 14,169 eligible tests from hospitalised individuals aged 75 years and older; 3005 cases (positive tests) and 11,164 controls (negative tests). Effectiveness was highest in the period 9-13 days post vaccination for both manufacturers at about 50%; 43.7% (95% CI, 20.1-60.3%) and 56.1% (95% CI, 25.2-74.2%) for Sanofi/GSK and Pfizer BA.4-5, respectively. There was evidence of waning with a reduction to about 30% for both manufacturers after 5-9 weeks. The longest time interval post vaccination for which we were able to estimate effectiveness was 10+ weeks post vaccination, at which point vaccine effectiveness was 17.6% (95% CI, -3.6 to 34.5%) and 37.9% (95% CI, 13.2-55.5%) for the Sanofi/GSK and Pfizer BA.4-5 boosters, respectively. Interpretation: Both boosters provided good protection against hospitalisation amongst older adults. The finding that the adjuvanted vaccine targeting the distant Beta strain had similar effectiveness to the bivalent mRNA vaccine targeting more closely matched Omicron sub-lineages is notable and highlights the need for further real-world studies into the effectiveness of vaccines from different vaccine platforms and formulations in the presence of matched and unmatched strains. Funding: No external funding.

Navigating parental attitudes on childhood vaccination in Jordan: a cross-sectional study.

This study investigated parental attitudes toward childhood vaccination in Jordan, focusing on acceptance, concerns, and perceptions. A cross-sectional survey conducted from January to February 2024 included 939 parents. Findings indicated that 85.4% (n = 802) of respondents received the COVID-19 vaccine, while only 25% (n = 229) vaccinated their children. Concerns regarding vaccine safety and efficacy were prevalent, with 63.9% (n = 600) expressing worries about side effects and 46.9% (n = 440) trusting immunization programs. Post-pandemic, 34% (n = 319) reported a more negative attitude. Logistic regression showed parents not vaccinating their children against COVID-19 were significantly less likely to exhibit positive attitudes toward childhood vaccination (OR = 0.412, p < 0.001). Older participants were more inclined toward negativity post-pandemic (OR = 1.031, p = 0.007). In conclusion, parental attitudes shifted post-COVID-19, reflecting hesitancy and decreased trust. Addressing concerns and restoring confidence are crucial, especially for children's health. Education through healthcare providers and dispelling social media misinformation are essential. Implementing strategies to enhance post-pandemic vaccine acceptance is imperative for preventing outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases.

Duration of antibody response to the receptor binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 in infected or vaccinated individuals - A one year retrospective cohort study.

The 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic raised many scientific and medical questions. Of interest are the duration and effectiveness of the humoral immune response, especially since part of the pandemic occurred in the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. We retrospectively studied 564 serum samples from 393 post-infected and vaccinated individuals to investigate the longevity and magnitude of the anti-spike IgG response. Our results showed that SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG antibodies are retained for nine-twelve months, in both groups. In the vaccinated group we found higher IgG levels, but with a steeper decrease in titer over the study period. The recovered group's antibody levels correlated well with the national infection trendline for 2021. Both groups showed different, but distinct neutralizing capabilities towards RBD. The anti-Spike IgG response was sustained and efficient, independently of the triggering event, infection or vaccination, with the adaptive capacity against new viral variants being more valuable after infection.

The COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center: a cornerstone for strengthening safety evidence for COVID-19 vaccination in the Republic of Korea.

The COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Committee (CoVaSC) was established in November 2021 to address the growing need for independent, in-depth scientific evidence on adverse events (AEs) following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. This initiative was requested by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and led by the National Academy of Medicine of Korea. In September 2022, the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center was established, strengthening CoVaSC's initiatives. The center has conducted various studies on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. During CoVaSC's second research year, from September 29, 2022 to July 19, 2023, the center was restructured into 4 departments: Epidemiological Research, Clinical Research, Communication & Education, and International Cooperation & Policy Research. Its main activities include (1) managing CoVaSC and the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center, (2) surveying domestic and international trends in AE causality investigation, (3) assessing AEs following COVID-19 vaccination, (4) fostering international collaboration and policy research, and (5) organizing regular fora and training sessions for the public and clinicians. Causality assessments have been conducted for 27 diseases, and independent research has been conducted after organizing ad hoc committees comprising both epidemiologists and clinical experts on each AE of interest. The research process included protocol development, data analysis, interpretation of results, and causality assessment. These research outcomes have been shared transparently with the public and healthcare experts through various fora. The COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center plans to continue strengthening and expanding its research activities to provide reliable, high-quality safety information to the public.

Challenges in capacity building of national immunization programs and emergency or pandemic vaccination responses in the Global Health Security Agenda member countries.

The Immunization Action Package aims to increase the vaccination rate for vaccine-preventable diseases to save lives. To achieve this, member countries of the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) must have the capacity to implement sustainable national immunization programs (NIPs) and to respond to emergency vaccination scenarios. This article focuses on 4 major areas of NIP capacity, including in emergency situations: infrastructure capacity, sustainable financing capacity, vaccine access and equity, and vaccination hesitancy. Countries require resilient infrastructure to achieve high vaccination rates and develop preparedness for public health emergencies. Financial sustainability is crucial in achieving high vaccination coverage to best implement initiatives and national programs. Furthermore, challenges to NIPs include vaccine access and equity, as inequitable distribution and access to vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 accelerated the impact of the pandemic. Lastly, the correlation between low acceptance and successful implementation of national initiatives suggests that vaccination hesitancy is another challenge to NIPs. In an attempt to overcome these challenges, the Expert Forum of the GHSA Seventh Ministerial Meeting was held to provide sessions allowing countries to share their national case studies and discuss strategies for capacity building of country-level NIPs, including for emergency responses.

Psychiatric adverse events associated with the COVID-19 vaccines approved in the Republic of Korea: a systematic review.

This systematic review evaluated psychiatric adverse events (AEs) following vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We included studies that reported or investigated psychiatric AEs in individuals who had received an approved COVID-19 vaccine in the Republic of Korea. Systematic electronic searches of Ovid-Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and KoreaMed databases were conducted on March 22, 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Non-randomized Studies 2.0. The study protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023449422). Of the 301 articles initially selected, 7 were included in the final analysis. All studies reported on sleep disturbances, and 2 highlighted anxiety-related AEs. Sleep disorders like insomnia and narcolepsy were the most prevalent AEs, while depression was not reported. Our review suggests that these AEs may have been influenced by biological mechanisms as well as the broader psychosocial context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although this study had limitations, such as a primary focus on the BNT162b2 vaccine and an observational study design, it offered a systematic, multi-vaccine analysis that fills a critical gap in the existing literature. This review underscores the need for continued surveillance of psychiatric AEs and guides future research to investigate underlying mechanisms, identify risk factors, and inform clinical management.

When Should I Get My Next COVID Vaccine? Data from the SUrveillance of responses to COVID-19 vaCcines in systEmic immunE mediated inflammatory Diseases (SUCCEED)study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how serologic responses to COVID vaccination/infection in immunemediated inflammatory disease (IMID) are affected by time since last vaccination and other factors. METHODS: Post-COVID-19 vaccination, data and dried blood spots/sera were collected from adults with rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, systemic lupus, ankylosing spondylitis/spondylarthritis and psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis. First sample was at enrolment and then 2-4 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months after latest vaccine dose. Multivariate generalized estimating equation regressions (including medications, demographics, and vaccination history) evaluated serologic response, based on log-transformed anti-RBD IgG titres; we also measured anti-nucleocapsid IgG. RESULTS: Positive associations for log-transformed anti-RBD titres were seen with female sex, number of doses, and self-reported COVID infections in 2021-2023. Negative associations were seen with prednisone, anti-TNF agents, and rituximab.Over 2021-2023, most (94%) of anti-nucleocapsid positivity was associated with a self-reported infection in the 3 months prior. From March 2021 to Feb 2022, anti-nucleocapsid positivity was present in 5-15% of samples and was highest in the post-Omicron era, with anti-nucleocapsid positivity trending to 30-35% or higher as of March 2023. Anti-nucleocapsid positivity in IMID remained lower than Canada's general population seroprevalence (>50% in 2022 and >75% in 2023).Time since last vaccination was negatively associated with log-transformed anti-RBD titres, particularly after 210 days. CONCLUSION: Ours is the first pan-Canadian IMID assessment of how vaccine history and other factors affect serologic COVID-19 vaccine responses. These findings may help individuals personalize vaccination decisions, including consideration of additional vaccination when >6 months has elapsed since last COVID vaccination/infection.

Ischemic and Inflammatory Ocular Adverse Events Following Different Types of Vaccination for COVID-19, and Their Incidence Analysis.

Background: To evaluate the ocular adverse event (OAE) and the incidence rate that can occur after coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. Methods: Patients who visited with an ophthalmologic diagnosis within a month of COVID-19 vaccination were retrospectively analyzed. OAEs were categorized as ischemia and inflammation by their presumed pathogenesis, and were compared by types of vaccine: messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) and viral vector vaccine. The crude incidence rate was calculated using data from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. Results: Twenty-four patients with OAEs after COVID-19 vaccination were reviewed: 10 patients after mRNA and 14 after viral vector vaccine. Retinal vein occlusion (9 patients) and paralytic strabismus (4 patients) were the leading diagnoses. Ischemic OAE was likely to occur after viral vector vaccines, while inflammatory OAE was closely related to mRNA vaccine (p=0.017). The overall incidence rate of OAE was 5.8 cases per million doses: 11.5 per million doses in viral vector vaccine and 3.4 per million doses in mRNA vaccine. Conclusion: OAEs can be observed shortly after the COVID-19 vaccination, and their category was different based on the types of vaccine. The information and incidence of OAE based on the type of vaccine can help monitor patients who were administered the COVID-19 vaccine.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among People Living with HIV: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Vaccine hesitancy is one of the top 10 threats to global health, which affects the prevalence and fatality of vaccine-preventable diseases over the world. During the COVID-19 pandemic, people living with HIV (PLWH) may have higher risks of infection, more serious complications, and worse prognosis without the protection of the COVID-19 vaccine. A systematic review and meta-analysis aiming to evaluate the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLWH was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for studies published between January 1, 2020, and August 31, 2022. The pooled prevalence with a corresponding 95%CI of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLWH was reported. Subgroup analysis was conducted to explore variation in prevalence across different categories. 23 studies with a total of 19,922 PLWH were included in this study. The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLWH was 34.0%, and the influencing factors included male, influenza vaccination experience, and a CD4 count of more than 200 cells/mm3. Subgroup analysis did not identify significant causes of heterogeneity but showed that the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLWH varies by study period, region, and race. Although all PLWH are recommended to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, a large proportion of them remain hesitant to be vaccinated. Therefore, governments and relevant institutions should take specific measures to encourage and promote vaccination to improve the coverage of the COVID-19 vaccine among PLWH.

COVID-19 vaccinations for patients with epilepsy in Guizhou Province, China: A cross-sectional study.

Several COVID-19 vaccines have been approved for emergency use according to China's immunization programs. These vaccines has created hope for patients with epilepsy, because the vaccines can help to reduce their risk of becoming infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The aim of this study was to investigate the COVID-19 vaccine safety in patients with epilepsy. Here, we assessed the time of symptom control and the features of adverse events of seizure patients following their COVID-19 vaccinations. The results showed that adverse events of COVID-19 vaccinations for epilepsy patients included local pain at the injection site, dizziness and headache, epileptic attack, somnolence, limb weakness, limb pain, allergy, and fever. In addition, the average recovery time of the adverse events was approximately 42 h. More importantly, our study showed that it was relatively safe to vaccinate epilepsy patients who did not experience seizures for approximately 12 months prior to the immunization date.

Pityriasis following COVID-19 vaccinations: a systematic review.

In the wake of a global COVID-19 pandemic, where innovations in vaccination technology and the speed of development and distribution have been unprecedented, a wide variety of post-vaccination cutaneous reactions have surfaced. However, there has not been a systematic review that investigates pityriasis eruptions and the associated variants following COVID-19 inoculations. A PubMed search using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was performed to find case reports from the earliest record through November 2022. Data including types of vaccination and pityriasis were extracted and a quality review was performed; 47 reports with 94 patients were found: 64.9% had pityriasis rosea (PR), 3.2% PR-like eruptions, 16.0% pityriasis rubra pilaris, 7.4% pityriasis lichenoides et varioliformis acuta, 3.2% pityriasis lichenoides chronica, and 5.3% had reactions described as atypical. The top three COVID-19 vaccinations reported were Pfizer-BioNTech (47.9%), Oxford-AstraZeneca (11.7%), and Moderna (8.5%). Pityriasis reactivity was reported most frequently after the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination, with pityriasis rosea being the most common variant. A large difference was additionally found between the ratio of post-vaccination pityriasis reactions following Pfizer and Moderna vaccinations (5.63), and the ratio of Pfizer's usage in the United States as of December 28, 2022 relative to that of Moderna (1.59). Further studies with adequate follow-up periods and diagnostic testing will thus need to be performed to elucidate the root of this discrepancy and better characterize the association between different pityriasis reactions and COVID-19 vaccinations.

Vaccination coverage during pregnancy and factors associated with refusal of recommended vaccinations: An Italian cross sectional study.

Background: The vaccines recommended during pregnancy are the Tdap, the influenza vaccine, and, during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the vaccine against COVID-19. This survey aimed at determining vaccination coverage among pregnant women and adverse events, reasons for vaccine refusal, and factors associated with vaccine uptake. Methods: A single-center cross-sectional study was conducted on women who delivered between March and April 2022 at Careggi University Hospital in Florence, Italy. Information on the vaccinations (Tdap, influenza and COVID-19) received during pregnancy were collected through in-person interviews. Results: Among 307 enrolled women (response rate 99 % on a study population of 310 eligible women), 74 % of patients were vaccinated with Tdap, 82 % against COVID-19, and only 33 % against influenza. Vaccination coverage for Tdap and COVID-19 was significantly higher among Italian than foreign patients (80 % vs 51 %, p < 0.001 and 86 % vs 69 %, p = 0.002, respectively), and for Tdap was higher among patients followed in the private vs public care setting. The main reasons behind refusal of vaccinations were low risk perception of influenza (41 %), insufficient information received from the prenatal care provider regarding the Tdap (35 %), and, for the COVID-19, fear of vaccine side effects (64 %), and concerns about effects on the fetus (70 %). Conclusions: Adherence to the influenza vaccine was low because of reduced perception of the disease risks. The difference in vaccination coverage between Italians and foreigners is an example of healthcare disparity. Better information provided to patients about vaccines' efficacy and safety is advisable to increase acceptance of recommended vaccines.

Engaging the public in decisions about emergency vaccine deployment strategies: Lessons from scenario-based discussions in Sierra Leone.

ABSTRACTThe COVID-19 pandemic has amplified discussions on emergency vaccine deployment strategies, with current perspectives often neglecting extensive community involvement in ethical, logistical and political aspects. Existing social science literature predominantly delves into factors influencing trust, overlooking the untapped potential for community engagement.Our study examines community preparedness in Sierra Leone's Kambia District, exploring diverse viewpoints on vaccine deployment strategies, emphasising Ebola and COVID-19 vaccinations. Utilising extensive ethnographic research from the Ebola vaccine trials (EBOVAC Salone) conducted in Kambia District from 2015 to 2021, including participant observation and tailored focus group discussions, we investigated various deployment scenarios with community leaders and citizens.Our findings underscore the multifaceted contributions of social science research with communities in shaping emergency vaccination strategies. These contributions span logistical insights, aligning campaigns with local livelihoods and social structures, and grounded ethical concerns assessing social justice outcomes across epidemic scenarios. This study emphasises the imperative of integrating discussions on vaccine confidence and deployment. It highlights communities' proficiency in epidemiological reasoning and their ability to bring this in conversation with salient socio-cultural, economic and religious dimensions. We therefore promote the cultivation of public dialogue, collaborative creation of impactful vaccination initiatives alongside relevant communities in recognition of their invaluable perspectives .

Pandemics, intellectual property and 'our economy': A worldview analysis of Canada's role in compromising global access to COVID-19 vaccines.

Despite self-congratulatory rhetoric, Canada compromised COVID-19 vaccine equity with policies impeding a proposed global waiver of vaccine intellectual property (IP) rules. To learn from Canada's vaccine nationalism we explore the worldview - a coherent textual picture of the world - in a sample of Government of Canada communications regarding global COVID-19 vaccine sharing. Analysed documents portray risks and disparities as unrelated to the dynamics and power relations of the Canadian and international economies. Against this depoliticised backdrop, economic growth fueled by strict IP rules and free trade is advanced as the solution to inequities. Global vaccine access and distribution are pursued via a charity-focused public-private-partnership approach, with proposals to relax international IP rules dismissed as unhelpful. Rather than a puzzling lapse by a good faith 'middle power', Canada's obstruction of global COVID-19 vaccine equity is a logical and deliberate extension of dominant neoliberal economic policy models. Health sector challenges to such models must prioritise equity in global pandemic governance via politically assertive and less conciliatory stances towards national governments and multilateral organisations. Mobilisation for health equity should transform the overall health-damaging macroeconomic model, complementing efforts based on specific individual health determinants or medical technologies.

Factors associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and evaluation of a recruitment protocol among healthcare personnel in a COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness study.

Objective: The objective of this study was to determine factors associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare personnel. Secondary objectives were to assess representativeness of recruited participants and the effectiveness of a multiple-contact protocol for recruiting healthcare personnel in this COVID-19 study. Design: Survey study, conducted as part of an observational test-negative study of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. Setting: University of Utah Health system, including both inpatient and outpatient facilities. Participants: Clinical and non-clinical healthcare personnel at University of Utah Health. 1456 were contacted and 503 (34.5%) completed the survey. Cases were all eligible employees testing positive for COVID-19, with 3:1 randomly selected, matched controls (test negative) selected weekly. Methods: Online survey. Results: Significant differences in the demographics of participants and the source population were observed; e.g., nursing staff comprised 31.6% of participants but only 23.3% of the source population. The multiple-contact recruitment protocol increased participation by ten percentage points and ensured equal representation of controls. Potential exposure to illness outside of work was strongly predictive of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (OR = 3.74; 95% CI: 2.29, 6.11) whereas potential exposure at work was protective against testing positive (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.29, 0.88). Conclusions: Carefully designed recruitment protocols increase participation and representation of controls, but bias in participant demographics still exists. The negative association between potential workplace exposure and positive test suggests testing bias in the test-negative design. Healthcare personnel's potential exposures to COVID-19 outside of the workplace are important predictors of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.