首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
《Vaccine》2023,41(14):2343-2348
AimWe estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of full (booster) vaccination against severe outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients during the Delta and Omicron waves.MethodsThe study extended from November 15, 2021 to April 17, 2022. Full vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination plus a booster ≥ 6 months later.ResultsWe studied 1138 patients (mean age: 66.6 years), of whom 826 (72.6 %) had ≥ 1 comorbidity. Of the 1138 patients, 75 (6.6 %) were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), 64 (5.6 %) received mechanical ventilation, and 172 (15.1 %) died. There were 386 (33.9 %) fully vaccinated, 172 (15.1 %) partially vaccinated, and 580 (51 %) unvaccinated patients. Unvaccinated patients were absent from work for longer periods compared to partially or fully vaccinated patients (mean absence of 20.1 days versus 12.3 and 17.3 days, respectively; p-value = 0.03). Compared to unvaccinated patients, fully vaccinated patients were less likely to be admitted to ICU [adjusted relative risk (ARR: 0.49; 95 % CI: 0.29–0.84)], mechanically ventilated (ARR: 0.43; 95 % CI: 0.23–0.80), and die (ARR: 0.57; 95 % CI: 0.42–0.78), while they were hospitalized for significantly shorter periods (ARR: 0.79; 95 % CI: 0.70–0.89). The adjusted full VE was 48.8 % (95 % CI: 42.7 %-54.9 %) against ICU admission, 55.4 % (95 % CI: 52.0 %-56.2 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 22.6 % (95 % CI: 7.4 %-34.8 %) against death. For patients with ≥ 3 comorbidities, VE was 56.2 % (95 % CI: 43.9 %-67.1 %) against ICU admission, 60.2 % (95 % CI: 53.7 %-65.4 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 43.9 % (95 % CI: 19.9 %-59.7 %) against death.ConclusionsFull (booster) COVID-19 vaccination conferred protection against severe outcomes, prolonged hospitalization, and prolonged work absenteeism.  相似文献   

2.
《Vaccine》2023,41(5):999-1002
This study assessed rural community pharmacists’ attitudes about COVID-19 vaccine booster doses and explored whether rural pharmacies offered these booster doses. Of the 80 rural Southeastern U.S. pharmacists who completed the online survey, the majority (n = 68, 85 %) offered boosters and 42 (52.5 %) had received the booster themselves. Alabama and Mississippi offered boosters less often than other states, and pharmacists who had foregone receiving COVID-19 vaccination or booster doses were less likely to offer the booster to their patients. Additionally, many pharmacists reported that they and their patients felt the booster was not needed. Community pharmacies provide access points for the COVID-19 booster in rural areas. Interventions for both pharmacists and patients are needed to address hesitancy and improve booster uptake in these communities.  相似文献   

3.
《Vaccine》2022,40(52):7660-7666
AimWe assessed the impact of COVID-19 vaccination status and time elapsed since the last vaccine dose on morbidity and absenteeism among healthcare personnel (HCP) in the context of a mandatory vaccination policy.MethodsWe followed 7592 HCP from November 15, 2021 through April 17, 2022. Full COVID-19 vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination series plus a booster dose at least six months later.ResultsThere were 6496 (85.6 %) fully vaccinated, 953 (12.5 %) not fully vaccinated, and 143 (1.9 %) unvaccinated HCP. A total of 2182 absenteeism episodes occurred. Of 2088 absenteeism episodes among vaccinated HCP with known vaccination status, 1971 (94.4 %) concerned fully vaccinated and 117 (5.6 %) not fully vaccinated. Fully vaccinated HCP had 1.6 fewer days of absence compared to those not fully vaccinated (8.1 versus 9.7; p-value < 0.001). Multivariable regression analyses showed that full vaccination was associated with shorter absenteeism compared to not full vaccination (OR: 0.56; 95 % CI: 0.36–0.87; p-value = 0.01). Compared to a history of ≤ 17.1 weeks since the last dose, a history of > 17.1 weeks since the last dose was associated with longer absenteeism (OR: 1.22, 95 % CI:1.02–1.46; p-value = 0.026) and increased risk for febrile episode (OR: 1.33; 95 % CI: 1.09–1.63; p-value = 0.004), influenza-like illness (OR: 1.53, 95 % CI: 1.02–2.30; p-value = 0.038), and COVID-19 (OR: 1.72; 95 % CI: 1.24–2.39; p-value = 0.001).ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic continues to impose a considerable impact on HCP. The administration of a vaccine dose in less than four months before significantly protected against COVID-19 and absenteeism duration, irrespective of COVID-19 vaccination status. Defining the optimal timing of boosters is imperative.  相似文献   

4.
《Vaccine》2022,40(41):5856-5859
BackgroundThe majority of healthcare workers (HCW) in the US report being fully vaccinated against COVID-19, yet little is known about vaccine decision-making for their household members, including children.MethodsCross-sectional survey July–August 2021 of HCW and their household members in Minnesota.Results94 % of eligible participants were vaccinated with the most common reasons being wanting to protect oneself, family and loved ones. Safety concerns were the most commonly reported reasons for not being vaccinated; a significantly higher proportion of unvaccinated compared to vaccinated HCW (58 % vs 12 %, p = 0.0035) and household adults (25 % vs 5 %, p = 0.03) reported prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nearly half of unvaccinated adults and two-thirds of unvaccinated children would be vaccinated if a vaccine mandate were in place.ConclusionsDespite high COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among HCWs, more research is required to identify and address the needs and concerns of healthcare workers who decline COVID-19 vaccination despite availability.  相似文献   

5.
《Vaccine》2022,40(35):5141-5152
BackgroundAchieving high COVID-19 vaccination rates among employees is necessary to prevent outbreaks in health care settings. The goal of the study was to produce actionable and timely evidence about factors underlying the intention and decisions to obtain the COVID-19 vaccine by employees.MethodsThe study was conducted from December 2020 – May 2021 with employees from a VA health care system in Southeastern US. The study used a convergent mixed methods design comprising two main activities: a cross-sectional survey conducted prior to COVID-19 vaccine distribution, and semi-structured interviews conducted 4–6 months after vaccine distribution. Data were collected about participant characteristics, vaccination intention prior to distribution, vaccination decision post-distribution, determinants of vaccination intention and decision, activating factors, sources of information and intervention needs. Data from the survey and interviews were analyzed separately and integrated narratively in the discussion.ResultsPrior to vaccine distribution, 77% of employees wanted to be vaccinated. Post vaccine distribution, we identified 5 distinct decision-making groups: 1) vaccine believers who actively sought vaccination and included those sometimes described as “immunization advocates”, 2) go along to get along (GATGA) individuals who got vaccinated but did not actively seek it, 3) cautious acceptors who got the COVID-19 vaccine after some delay, 4) fence sitters who remained uncertain about getting vaccinated, and 5) vaccine refusers who actively rejected the COVID-19 vaccine. Participants identifying with Black or multiple races were more likely to express hesitancy in their vaccination intention.ConclusionThe findings of our study highlight distinct decision-making profiles associated with COVID-19 vaccination among employees of a VA health care system, and provide tailored recommendations to reduce vaccine hesitancy in this population.  相似文献   

6.
《Vaccine》2021,39(43):6341-6345
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is leading globally in many indicators for tackling the COVID-19 pandemic. This ranges from taking adequate preventive measures to the free vaccination drive and viable public health strategy. As of 18 August 2021, the UAE has significantly reduced the number of cases and successfully administered 17,454,250 doses. Furthermore, efforts and plans are underway to provide the third dose to high-risk people three months after completing the second dose and six months later to others. The UAE is considered one of the leaders globally for vaccinating “medically eligible” residents against COVID-19, with over 70% of the population currently fully vaccinated in the drive towards achieving herd immunity. The UAE's vaccination program is on track, covering a significant part of the population. The massive efforts of the National Vaccination Program's roll-out made by the UAE government and the various health authorities and stakeholders were vital for the general public's active participation in its success.  相似文献   

7.
目的 调查烟台市18岁及以上人群新冠疫苗加强免疫的接种意愿,为相关卫生主管部门开展新冠肺炎加强免疫工作提供参考.方法 采用整群抽样方法,在烟台市14个区市中,每个区市随机抽取2个城市社区和2个行政村作为调查区域,对区域内18岁及以上全部人群进行问卷调查.结果 共有138 664名研究对象完成问卷调查,94.52%的研究...  相似文献   

8.
《Vaccine》2022,40(46):6664-6669
BackgroundElderly people in long-term care facilities (LTCF) are at higher risk for (severe) COVID-19, yet evidence of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in this population is scarce. In November 2021 (Delta period), a COVID-19 outbreak occurred at a LTCF in the Netherlands, continuing despite measures and booster vaccination campaign. We investigated the outbreak to assess VE of primary COVID-19 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality, and to describe the impact of the booster vaccination.MethodsWe calculated attack rate (AR) and case fatality (CF) per vaccination status (unvaccinated, primarily vaccinated and boostered). We calculated VE – at on average 6 months after vaccination – as 1- risk ratio (RR) using the crude risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between vaccination status (primary vaccination versus unvaccinated) and outcomes (SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality < 30 days after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2).ResultsThe overall AR was 67% (70/105). CF was 33% (2/6) among unvaccinated cases, 12% among primarily vaccinated (7/58) and 0% (0/5) among boostered. The VE of primary vaccination was 17% (95% CI ?28%; 46%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 70% (95% CI ?44%; 96%) against mortality. Among boostered residents (N = 55), there were 25 cases in the first week after receiving the booster dose, declining to 5 in the second and none in the third week.ConclusionVE of primary vaccination in residents of LTCF was very low against SARS-CoV-2 infection and moderate against mortality. There were few cases at 2 weeks after the booster dose and no deaths, despite the presence of susceptible residents. These data are consistent with the positive impact of the booster vaccination in curbing transmission. Timely booster vaccination in residents of LTCF is therefore important.  相似文献   

9.
《Vaccine》2022,40(18):2612-2618
ObjectiveTo understand COVID-19 vaccine perspectives among healthcare workers serving diverse communities.MethodsA dual English/Spanish survey was distributed to healthcare workers in the United States from 3/12/2021–4/22/2021 by the Migrant Clinicians Network, Society of Refugee Healthcare Providers, a Federally Qualified Healthcare Center, and social media advertisement to general primary care workers.Results517 responses were at least 50% complete and included in the analysis. Among these, 88% (457/517) indicated vaccine acceptance. Factors associated with acceptance included not reporting any vaccine concerns, identifying as male, ≥65 years of age, being a physician or advanced practice provider, and interacting directly with patients from refugee, immigrant, and migrant (RIM) communities. Participants identified educational information as most helpful for themselves when making a vaccine decision, but a healthcare provider’s recommendation as most helpful for their patients.ConclusionHealthcare workers, especially those serving RIM communities, are vaccine accepting. Tailoring vaccine-related information to healthcare workers may improve vaccine confidence for both themselves and patients who rely on them for information.  相似文献   

10.
《Vaccine》2022,40(9):1231-1237
IntroductionRefugees often face increased risk of exposure to COVID-19 due to their disproportionate representation in the essential workforce and crowded household conditions. There is a paucity of data about risk factors for under-immunization for COVID-19 among refugees.MethodsRefugees were surveyed in two phases that corresponded to before and after wide availability of COVID-19 vaccines. Participants were asked about their attitudes, and perceptions about COVID-19, previous acceptance of vaccines, sources utilized to obtain trusted health information, and intent to get vaccinated. The overall participant vulnerability was assessed using the social vulnerability index. In-depth semi-structured interviews were completed with key stakeholders through snowball sampling.ResultsOf 247 refugees, 244 agreed to participate in the initial survey. Among those, 140 (57.4%) intended to get vaccinated, 43 (17.6%) were unsure, and 61 (25%) did not intend to get vaccinated. In the follow up survey, all 215 who were reached, agreed to provide information about their vaccination status. Among those respondents, 141 (65.6%) were either vaccinated or expressed intent to do so, and 74 (34.4%) remained hesitant. We did not observe any significant correlation between socio-demographic variables, country of origin, and vaccination status/intent. Among those who initially intended to get vaccinated, nearly 1 in 5 changed their mind and decided to forego vaccination, and among those who initially did not plan getting vaccinated, 1 in 3 changed their mind and got vaccinated. Fears related to the vaccine, concerns that the vaccine is religiously prohibited, “wait and see” how others did with the vaccine, communication and transportation barriers were commonly cited as reason not to get vaccinated.ConclusionsOver a third of refugees in our study were hesitant to get vaccinated. Refugees desired additional education about the benefits and safety of vaccines along with easier access to vaccination clinics in their communities.  相似文献   

11.
《Vaccine》2023,41(15):2439-2446
BackgroundAustralia implemented an mRNA-based booster vaccination strategy against the COVID-19 Omicron variant in November 2021. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the booster strategy over 180 days.MethodsWe developed a decision-analytic Markov model of COVID-19 to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a booster strategy (administered 3 months after 2nd dose) in those aged ≥ 16 years, from a healthcare system perspective. The willingness-to-pay threshold was chosen as A$ 50,000.ResultsCompared with 2-doses of COVID-19 vaccines without a booster, Australia's booster strategy would incur an additional cost of A$0.88 billion but save A$1.28 billion in direct medical cost and gain 670 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in 180 days of its implementation. This suggested the booster strategy is cost-saving, corresponding to a benefit-cost ratio of 1.45 and a net monetary benefit of A$0.43 billion. The strategy would prevent 1.32 million new infections, 65,170 hospitalisations, 6,927 ICU admissions and 1,348 deaths from COVID-19 in 180 days. Further, a universal booster strategy of having all individuals vaccinated with the booster shot immediately once their eligibility is met would have resulted in a gain of 1,599 QALYs, a net monetary benefit of A$1.46 billion and a benefit-cost ratio of 1.95 in 180 days.ConclusionThe COVID-19 booster strategy implemented in Australia is likely to be effective and cost-effective for the Omicron epidemic. Universal booster vaccination would have further improved its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.  相似文献   

12.
《Vaccine》2023,41(33):4782-4786
BackgroundVaccine hesitancy remains an obstacle in disease prevention. The recent COVID-19 pandemic highlighted this issue and may influence acceptance of other recommended immunizations. The objective of this study was to determine the association between receiving the COVID-19 vaccination and the subsequent acceptance of the influenza vaccination in a Veteran population that historically declined influenza vaccination.MethodsInfluenza vaccination acceptance rates for the 2021–2022 influenza season were compared in patients who historically declined the influenza vaccine and either received or declined COVID-19 vaccinations. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze factors associated with receiving influenza vaccination among vaccine hesitant individuals.ResultsA higher proportion of patients who had received the COVID-19 vaccination(s) subsequently accepted the influenza vaccination compared to the control group (37% vs. 11%, OR = 5.03; CI 3.15–8.26; p = 0.0001).ConclusionAmong previous influenza vaccine decliners, those who received COVID-19 vaccination had significantly higher odds of receiving subsequent influenza vaccination.  相似文献   

13.
《Vaccine》2023,41(7):1378-1389
BackgroundFrom September 2021, Health Care Workers (HCWs) in Wales began receiving a COVID-19 booster vaccination. This is the first dose beyond the primary vaccination schedule. Given the emergence of new variants, vaccine waning vaccine, and increasing vaccination hesitancy, there is a need to understand booster vaccine uptake and subsequent breakthrough in this high-risk population.MethodsWe conducted a prospective, national-scale, observational cohort study of HCWs in Wales using anonymised, linked data from the SAIL Databank. We analysed uptake of COVID-19 booster vaccinations from September 2021 to February 2022, with comparisons against uptake of the initial primary vaccination schedule. We also analysed booster breakthrough, in the form of PCR-confirmed SARS-Cov-2 infection, comparing to the second primary dose. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate associations for vaccination uptake and breakthrough regarding staff roles, socio-demographics, household composition, and other factors.ResultsWe derived a cohort of 73,030 HCWs living in Wales (78% female, 60% 18–49 years old). Uptake was quickest amongst HCWs aged 60 + years old (aHR 2.54, 95%CI 2.45–2.63), compared with those aged 18–29. Asian HCWs had quicker uptake (aHR 1.18, 95%CI 1.14–1.22), whilst Black HCWs had slower uptake (aHR 0.67, 95%CI 0.61–0.74), compared to white HCWs. HCWs residing in the least deprived areas were slightly quicker to have received a booster dose (aHR 1.12, 95%CI 1.09–1.16), compared with those in the most deprived areas. Strongest associations with breakthrough infections were found for those living with children (aHR 1.52, 95%CI 1.41–1.63), compared to two-adult only households. HCWs aged 60 + years old were less likely to get breakthrough infections, compared to those aged 18–29 (aHR 0.42, 95%CI 0.38–0.47).ConclusionVaccination uptake was consistently lower among black HCWs, as well as those from deprived areas. Whilst breakthrough infections were highest in households with children.  相似文献   

14.
《Vaccine》2019,37(30):4001-4007
ObjectivesIn 2012, British Columbia (BC) implemented a province-wide vaccinate-or-mask influenza prevention policy for healthcare workers (HCWs) with the aim of improving HCW coverage, and reducing illness in patients and staff. We assess post-policy impacts of HCW vaccination status on their absenteeism.MethodsWe matched individual HCW payroll data from December 1, 2012 to March 31, 2017 with annually self-reported vaccination status for BC health authority employees to assess sick rates (sick time as a proportion of sick time and productive time). We modelled adjusted odds ratios (OR) of taking any sick time, relative rates (RR) of sick time taken, and predicted mean sick rates by vaccination status in influenza (December 1–March 31) and non-influenza seasons (April 1 to November 30). We used two methods to assess changes in influenza season sick rates for HCWs who had a change in their vaccination status over the five years.ResultsHCWs who reported ‘early’ vaccination (before December 1 when the policy is in effect) were less likely to take sick time (OR 0.874, 95%CI: 0.866–0.881) and took less sick time (RR 0.907, 95%CI: 0.901–0.912) in influenza season compared to HCWs who did not report vaccination; whereas HCWs who reported ‘late’ (between December 1 and March 31, and subject to masking until vaccinated) had similar sick rates to HCWs who did not report vaccination. These trends were also observed in non-influenza season. Influenza season sick rates were similar for HCWs that had at least one year of ‘early’ vaccination and one year where vaccination was not reported over the five year period.ConclusionsOverall absenteeism is lower among HCWs who report vaccination versus those who do not report. However, absenteeism behaviours appear to be influenced by individual level factors other than vaccination status.  相似文献   

15.
16.
《Vaccine》2022,40(34):4998-5009
Hesitancy to receive the COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs) in low-resource settings, such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), is a major global health challenge. This study identifies changes in willingness to receive vaccination among 588 HCWs in the DRC and reported influences on COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Up to 25 repeated measures were collected from participants between August 2020 to August 2021. Among the overall cohort, between August 2020 and mid-March 2021, the proportion of HCWs in each period of data collection reporting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy ranged from 8.6% (95% CI: 5.97, 11.24) to 24.3% (95% CI: 20.12, 28.55). By early April 2021, the proportion reporting hesitancy more than doubled (52.0%; 95% CI: 46.22, 57.83). While hesitancy in the cohort began to decline by late-June 2021, 22.6% (95% CI: 18.05, 27.18) respondents indicated hesitancy in late-August 2021 which remains greater than the proportion of hesitancy at any time prior to early-March 2021. Patterns in reported influences on COVID-19 vaccination were varied with the proportion reporting some influences (e.g., no serious side effects, country of vaccine production) remaining stable throughout the year and other factors (e.g., recommendation of Ministry of Health, ease of vaccination) falling in popularity among respondents. Agreement that the national vaccination schedule should be followed apart from the COVID-19 vaccine remained high among respondents throughout the study period. This study shows that, among a cohort of HCWs in the DRC who have likely been influenced by regional, national, and global factors, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has fluctuated during the pandemic and should not be treated as a static factor. Additional research to determine which factors most influence HCWs’ willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine offers opportunities to reduce vaccine hesitancy among this important population through tailored public health messaging.  相似文献   

17.
18.
19.
《Vaccine》2022,40(23):3159-3164
ObjectivesHealthcare workers (HCWs), at increased risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were among the primary targets for vaccination, which became mandatory for them on September 15th, 2021 in France. In November they were confronted to the fifth COVID-19 wave despite excellent vaccine coverage. We aimed to estimate the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection after complete vaccination among HCWs with different vaccination schemes, and its determinants.MethodsWe enrolled all HCWs in the university hospital of Rennes, France who had received complete vaccination (two doses of COVID-19 vaccine). The delay from last vaccination dose to SARS-CoV-2 infection was computed. Fitted mixed Cox survival model with a random effect applied to exposure risk periods to account for epidemic variation was used to estimate the determinants of SARS-CoV-2 infection after complete vaccination.ResultsOf the 6674 (82%) HCWs who received complete vaccination (36% BNT162b2, 29% mRNA-1273, and 34% mixed with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) and were prospectively followed-up for a median of 7.0 [6.3–8.0] months, 160 (2.4%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Incidence density of SARS-CoV-2 infection after complete vaccination was 3.39 [2.89–3.96] infections per 1000 person-month. Median time from vaccine completion to SARS-CoV-2 infection was 5.5 [3.2–6.6] months. Using fitted mixed Cox regression with the delay as a time-dependent variable and random effect applied to exposure risk periods, age (P < 0.001) was independently associated with the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccine schemes were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection (P = 0.068). A period effect was significantly associated with the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (P < 0.001).ConclusionsIn this real-world study, incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection increases with time in fully vaccinated HCWs with no differences according to the vaccination scheme. The short delay between complete vaccination and incident SARS-CoV-2 infection highlights the need for sustained barrier measures even in fully vaccinated HCWs.  相似文献   

20.
《Vaccine》2023,41(5):1161-1168
BackgroundVaccination refusal exacerbates global COVID-19 vaccination inequities. No studies in East Africa have examined temporal trends in vaccination refusal, precluding addressing refusal. We assessed vaccine refusal over time in Kenya, and characterized factors associated with changes in vaccination refusal.MethodsWe analyzed data from the Kenya Rapid Response Phone Survey (RRPS), a household cohort survey representative of the Kenyan population including refugees. Vaccination refusal (defined as the respondent stating they would not receive the vaccine if offered to them at no cost) was measured in February and October 2021. Proportions of vaccination refusal were plotted over time. We analyzed factors in vaccination refusal using a weighted multivariable logistic regression including interactions for time.FindingsAmong 11,569 households, vaccination refusal in Kenya decreased from 24 % in February 2021 to 9 % in October 2021. Vaccination refusal was associated with having education beyond the primary level (?4.1[?0.7,?8.9] percentage point difference (ppd)); living with somebody who had symptoms of COVID-19 in the past 14 days (?13.72[?8.9,?18.6]ppd); having symptoms of COVID-19 in the past 14 days (11.0[5.1,16.9]ppd); and distrusting the government in responding to COVID-19 (14.7[7.1,22.4]ppd). There were significant interactions with time and: refugee status and geography, living with somebody with symptoms of COVID-19, having symptoms of COVID-19, and believing in misinformation.InterpretationThe temporal reduction in vaccination refusal in Kenya likely represents substantial strides by the Kenyan vaccination program and possible learnt lessons which require examination. Going forward, there are still several groups which need specific targeting to decrease vaccination refusal and improve vaccination equity, including those with lower levels of education, those with recent COVID-19 symptoms, those who do not practice personal COVID-19 mitigation measures, refugees in urban settings, and those who do not trust the government. Policy and program should focus on decreasing vaccination refusal in these populations, and research focus on understanding barriers and motivators for vaccination.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号