Preferences for Attributes of Initial COVID-19 Diagnosis in the United States and China During the Pandemic: Discrete Choice Experiment With Propensity Score Matching

BackgroundChina and the United States play critical leading roles in the global effort to contain the COVID-19 virus. Therefore, their population’s preferences for initial diagnosis were compared to provide policy and clinical insights.ObjectiveWe aim to quantify and compare the public’s preferences for medical management of fever and the attributes of initial diagnosis in the case of presenting symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in China and the United States.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study from January to March 2021 in China and the United States using an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire distributed through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk; in the United States) and recruited volunteers (in China). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match the 2 groups of respondents from China and the United States to minimize confounding effects. In addition, the respondents’ preferences for different diagnosis options were evaluated using a mixed logit model (MXL) and latent class models (LCMs). Moreover, demographic data were collected and compared using the chi-square test, Fisher test, and Mann-Whitney U test.ResultsA total of 9112 respondents (5411, 59.4%, from China and 3701, 40.6%, from the United States) who completed our survey were included in our analysis. After PSM, 1240 (22.9%) respondents from China and 1240 (33.5%) from the United States were matched for sex, age, educational level, occupation, and annual salary levels. The segmented sizes of 3 classes of respondents from China were 870 (70.2%), 270 (21.8%), and 100 (8.0%), respectively. Meanwhile, the US respondents’ segmented sizes were 269 (21.7%), 139 (11.2%), and 832 (67.1%), respectively. Respondents from China attached the greatest importance to the type of medical institution (weighted importance=40.0%), while those from the United States valued the waiting time (weighted importance=31.5%) the most. Respondents from China preferred the emergency department (coefficient=0.973, reference level: online consultation) and fever clinic (a special clinic for the treatment of fever patients for the prevention and control of acute infectious diseases in China; coefficient=0.974, reference level: online consultation), while those from the United States preferred private clinics (general practices; coefficient=0.543, reference level: online consultation). Additionally, shorter waiting times, COVID-19 nucleic acid testing arrangements, higher reimbursement rates, and lower costs were always preferred.ConclusionsImprovements in the availability of COVID-19 testing and medical professional skills and increased designated health care facilities may help boost potential health care seeking during COVID-19 and prevent unrecognized community spreading of SARS-CoV-2 in China and the United States. Moreover, to better prevent future waves of pandemics, identify undiagnosed patients, and encourage those undiagnosed to seek health care services to curb the pandemic, the hierarchical diagnosis and treatment system needs improvement in China, and the United States should focus on reducing diagnosis costs and raising the reimbursement rate of medical insurance.     

Changes in Parental Attitudes Toward COVID-19 Vaccination and Routine Childhood Vaccination During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Repeated Cross-sectional Survey Study

BackgroundIt was reported that one in four parents were hesitant about vaccinating their children in China. Previous studies have revealed a declining trend in the vaccine willingness rate in China. There is a need to monitor the level of parental vaccine hesitancy toward routine childhood vaccination and hesitancy toward the COVID-19 vaccine during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess changes in trends of parental attitudes toward routine childhood vaccines and COVID-19 vaccinations across different time periods in China.MethodsThree waves of cross-sectional surveys were conducted on parents residing in Wuxi City in Jiangsu Province, China from September to October 2020, February to March 2021, and May to June 2021. Participants were recruited from immunization clinics. Chi-square tests were used to compare the results of the three surveys, controlling for sociodemographic factors. Binary and multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine factors related to parental vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 vaccine willingness.ResultsOverall, 2881, 1038, and 1183 participants were included in the survey’s three waves. Using the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, 7.8% (225/2881), 15.1% (157/1038), and 5.5% (65/1183) of parents showed hesitancy to childhood vaccination (P<.001), and 59.3% (1709/2881), 64.6% (671/1038), and 92% (1088/1183) of parents agreed to receive a COVID-19 vaccine themselves in the first, second, and third surveys, respectively (P<.001). In all three surveys, “concerns about vaccine safety and side effects” was the most common reason for refusal.ConclusionsThere has been an increasing acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination in Wuxi City, China. Effective interventions are needed to mitigate public concerns about vaccine safety.     

Patient Preferences for Medications in Managing Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Discrete Choice Experiment

ObjectivesTo quantify patients’ maximum acceptable risk (MAR) of urinary and genital tract infections (UGTI) in exchange for benefits associated with treatments for managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).MethodsIn a discrete choice experiment, adult patients with T2DM and currently on metformin and/or sulphonylurea (first-line treatments) were asked to choose between 2 hypothetical medications defined by 6 attributes: years of medication effectiveness in controlling blood glucose, weight reduction, UGTI risk, risk of hospitalization from heart failure, all-cause mortality risk, and out-of-pocket medication cost. We used latent class logistic regression parameters to estimate the conditional relative importance of treatment attributes and MAR of UGTI for various treatment benefits.ResultsA 2-class latent class model was identified as the best fit for the responses from 147 patients. The first class (49% of sample), termed as “survival-conscious,” stated that they were willing to accept 46% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2%-90%) UGTI risk in exchange for a reduction from 6% to 1% in all-cause mortality risk. The second class (51% of sample), termed as “UGTI/cost-conscious” were willing to accept significantly lower (6%; CI: 2%-11%, and 5%; CI: 2%-8%) UGTI risk in exchange for the same reduction in all-cause mortality and hospitalization risks, respectively.ConclusionsOn average, patients were willing to trade higher UGTI risk for a more effective medication. Our findings suggest that physicians should present the benefits and potential side effects of all available treatments and consider patient preferences in their treatment recommendations.     

Patterns of SARS-CoV-2 Testing Preferences in a National Cohort in the United States: Latent Class Analysis of a Discrete Choice Experiment

BackgroundInadequate screening and diagnostic testing in the United States throughout the first several months of the COVID-19 pandemic led to undetected cases transmitting disease in the community and an underestimation of cases. Though testing supply has increased, maintaining testing uptake remains a public health priority in the efforts to control community transmission considering the availability of vaccinations and threats from variants.ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify patterns of preferences for SARS-CoV-2 screening and diagnostic testing prior to widespread vaccine availability and uptake.MethodsWe conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) among participants in the national, prospective CHASING COVID (Communities, Households, and SARS-CoV-2 Epidemiology) Cohort Study from July 30 to September 8, 2020. The DCE elicited preferences for SARS-CoV-2 test type, specimen type, testing venue, and result turnaround time. We used latent class multinomial logit to identify distinct patterns of preferences related to testing as measured by attribute-level part-worth utilities and conducted a simulation based on the utility estimates to predict testing uptake if additional testing scenarios were offered.ResultsOf the 5098 invited cohort participants, 4793 (94.0%) completed the DCE. Five distinct patterns of SARS-CoV-2 testing emerged. Noninvasive home testers (n=920, 19.2% of participants) were most influenced by specimen type and favored less invasive specimen collection methods, with saliva being most preferred; this group was the least likely to opt out of testing. Fast-track testers (n=1235, 25.8%) were most influenced by result turnaround time and favored immediate and same-day turnaround time. Among dual testers (n=889, 18.5%), test type was the most important attribute, and preference was given to both antibody and viral tests. Noninvasive dual testers (n=1578, 32.9%) were most strongly influenced by specimen type and test type, preferring saliva and cheek swab specimens and both antibody and viral tests. Among hesitant home testers (n=171, 3.6%), the venue was the most important attribute; notably, this group was the most likely to opt out of testing. In addition to variability in preferences for testing features, heterogeneity was observed in the distribution of certain demographic characteristics (age, race/ethnicity, education, and employment), history of SARS-CoV-2 testing, COVID-19 diagnosis, and concern about the pandemic. Simulation models predicted that testing uptake would increase from 81.6% (with a status quo scenario of polymerase chain reaction by nasal swab in a provider’s office and a turnaround time of several days) to 98.1% by offering additional scenarios using less invasive specimens, both viral and antibody tests from a single specimen, faster turnaround time, and at-home testing.ConclusionsWe identified substantial differences in preferences for SARS-CoV-2 testing and found that offering additional testing options would likely increase testing uptake in line with public health goals. Additional studies may be warranted to understand if preferences for testing have changed since the availability and widespread uptake of vaccines.     

SIRVA (Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration) following mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination: Case discussion and literature review

Shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) is an increasingly recognised complication after vaccination and presents with significant shoulder pain and stiffness. SIRVA is thought to occur as a result of improper administration of vaccine into the subdeltoid bursa or shoulder joint. This results in an inflammatory cascade that damages the structures in the shoulder region. The incidence of SIRVA is relatively higher for influenza vaccination due its widespread administration. We present a reported case of SIRVA following a mRNA COVID-19 vaccination and review the current literature. As we embark on a worldwide scale of COVID-19 vaccination, it is of utmost important that we use proper vaccination techniques and screen patients at risk of SIRVA. This would improve the efficacy of the vaccine and improve the outcomes of the vaccination programme.     

Assessing COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake and Effectiveness Through the North West London Vaccination Program: Retrospective Cohort Study

BackgroundOn March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared SARS-CoV-2, causing COVID-19, as a pandemic. The UK mass vaccination program commenced on December 8, 2020, vaccinating groups of the population deemed to be most vulnerable to severe COVID-19 infection.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the early vaccine administration coverage and outcome data across an integrated care system in North West London, leveraging a unique population-level care data set. Vaccine effectiveness of a single dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines were compared.MethodsA retrospective cohort study identified 2,183,939 individuals eligible for COVID-19 vaccination between December 8, 2020, and February 24, 2021, within a primary, secondary, and community care integrated care data set. These data were used to assess vaccination hesitancy across ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic deprivation measures (Pearson product-moment correlations); investigate COVID-19 transmission related to vaccination hubs; and assess the early effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination (after a single dose) using time-to-event analyses with multivariable Cox regression analysis to investigate if vaccination independently predicted positive SARS-CoV-2 in those vaccinated compared to those unvaccinated.ResultsIn this study, 5.88% (24,332/413,919) of individuals declined and did not receive a vaccination. Black or Black British individuals had the highest rate of declining a vaccine at 16.14% (4337/26,870). There was a strong negative association between socioeconomic deprivation and rate of declining vaccination (r=–0.94; P=.002) with 13.5% (1980/14,571) of individuals declining vaccination in the most deprived areas compared to 0.98% (869/9609) in the least. In the first 6 days after vaccination, 344 of 389,587 (0.09%) individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The rate increased to 0.13% (525/389,243) between days 7 and 13, before then gradually falling week on week. At 28 days post vaccination, there was a 74% (hazard ratio 0.26, 95% CI 0.19-0.35) and 78% (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.18-0.27) reduction in risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 for individuals that received the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines, respectively, when compared with unvaccinated individuals. A very low proportion of hospital admissions were seen in vaccinated individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (288/389,587, 0.07% of all patients vaccinated) providing evidence for vaccination effectiveness after a single dose.ConclusionsThere was no definitive evidence to suggest COVID-19 was transmitted as a result of vaccination hubs during the vaccine administration rollout in North West London, and the risk of contracting COVID-19 or becoming hospitalized after vaccination has been demonstrated to be low in the vaccinated population. This study provides further evidence that a single dose of either the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine or the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is effective at reducing the risk of testing positive for COVID-19 up to 60 days across all age groups, ethnic groups, and risk categories in an urban UK population.     

A Discrete Choice Experiment to Elicit General Population Preferences Around the Factors Influencing the Choice to Make Clinical Negligence Claims

ObjectivesThis article determines public stated preferences around different factors that influence the choice to make clinical negligence claims against a national healthcare system.MethodsA large online survey was conducted using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) with the UK general population (N = 1013). DCE tasks involved a single profile and participants chose whether to make a claim for compensation (yes/no) after one of 3 randomly allocated patient safety incident (PSI) “scenarios” of different severities (mild, moderate, severe). DCE attributes described the actions of the healthcare system after a PSI and characteristics of the clinical negligence claims process. The data were modeled separately for each scenario (mild, moderate, severe) using logistic regression. Marginal effects and the probability of making a claim in a baseline case were estimated.ResultsProbability of choosing to claim was reduced by receipt of an apology, investigation and prevention of recurrence of the PSI, and longer time until claim decision and increased by an easy and straightforward claims process and high chance of compensation and for the mild scenario higher compensation amounts. Marginal effects and baseline case probabilities differed by scenario severity.ConclusionsThe results suggest the actions of the healthcare system after a PSI and characteristics of the claims process have a larger impact on the probability of making a claim for milder PSIs. For more severe PSIs, a larger probability of making a claim was observed, and the choice was less influenced by the actions of the healthcare system after the PSI and characteristics of the claims process.     

Patient Preferences for Treatment of Low Back Pain—A Discrete Choice Experiment

BackgroundBack pain imposes a substantial economic and social burden, and treatment decisions are distorted by conflicting evidence. Thus, it is important to include patient preferences in decision making and policy making.ObjectiveTo contribute to the understanding of patient preferences in relation to the choice of treatment for low back pain.MethodsA discrete choice experiment was conducted with consecutive patients referred to a regional spine center. The respondents (n = 348) were invited to respond to a choice of two hypothetical treatment options and an opt-out option. The treatment attributes included the treatment modality, the risk of relapse, the reduction in pain, and the expected increase in the ability to perform activities of daily living. In addition, the wait time to achieve the treatment effect was used as a payment vehicle. Mixed logit models were created to perform analysis. Subgroup analysis, dividing respondents into sociodemographic and disease-related categories, further explored the willingness to wait.ResultsRespondents assigned positive utilities to positive treatment outcomes and disutility to higher risks and longer waits for effects of treatment and to surgical interventions. The model captured significant heterogeneity within the sample for the outcomes of pain reduction and the ability to pursue activities of daily living and for the treatment modality. The subgroup analysis revealed differences in the willingness to wait, especially with regard to treatment modality, the level of pain experienced at the time of data collection, and the respondents’ preferences for surgery.ConclusionsThe majority of the respondents prefer nonsurgical interventions, but patients are willing to wait for more ideal outcomes and preferred interventions. The results show that health care professionals have a very important task in communicating clearly about the expected results of treatment and the basis of their treatment decisions, as patients' preferences are highly individual.     

Societal Effects Are a Major Factor for the Uptake of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Digital Contact Tracing App in The Netherlands

ObjectivesOur study investigates the extent to which uptake of a COVID-19 digital contact-tracing (DCT) app among the Dutch population is affected by its configurations, its societal effects, and government policies toward such an app.MethodsWe performed a discrete choice experiment among Dutch adults including 7 attributes, that is, who gets a notification, waiting time for testing, possibility for shops to refuse customers who have not installed the app, stopping condition for contact tracing, number of people unjustifiably quarantined, number of deaths prevented, and number of households with financial problems prevented. The data were analyzed by means of panel mixed logit models.ResultsThe prevention of deaths and financial problems of households had a very strong influence on the uptake of the app. Predicted app uptake rates ranged from 24% to 78% for the worst and best possible app for these societal effects. We found a strong positive relationship between people’s trust in government and people’s propensity to install the DCT app.ConclusionsThe uptake levels we find are much more volatile than the uptake levels predicted in comparable studies that did not include societal effects in their discrete choice experiments. Our finding that the societal effects are a major factor in the uptake of the DCT app results in a chicken-or-the-egg causality dilemma. That is, the societal effects of the app are severely influenced by the uptake of the app, but the uptake of the app is severely influenced by its societal effects.     

Estimating the Danish Populations' Preferences for Pharmacogenetic Testing Using a Discrete Choice Experiment. The Case of Treating Depression

Objective:  The objective is to estimate willingness-to-pay (WTP) for pharmacogenetic testing in the treatment of depression.
Methods:  In a web-based discrete choice questionnaire, four attributes were included: 1) number of changes in antidepressants before symptom relief; 2) time with dosage adjustments due to adverse side effects and/or lack of effects; 3) cost of pharmacogenetic testing; 4) probability of benefits from pharmacogenetic testing. Respondents were asked to choose between two scenarios; 1) pharmacogenetic testing; and 2) an opt-out option reflecting a scenario without pharmacogenetic testing. The indirect utility model was assumed to be multiplicative in probability of benefits and reduced time with dosage adjustments as well as reduced number of antidepressant changes.
Results:  Most coefficients had the expected signs and were statistically significant. WTP for avoidance of one change in antidepressant medication is 1571 Danish Krone (DKK), whereas WTP for reducing the period with dosage-adjustments by 1 month is DKK604. Both were statistically significantly different from zero.
Conclusion:  If diagnosed with depression, peoples' WTP for pharmacogenetic testing appears to exceed its price as long as there is a reasonable probability for improvements in treatment (in the present case 10%). Utility is associated with outcomes only. Hence, other modes of provision of similar improvements in treatment may be valued equally highly. WTP estimates and the associated policy implications appear to be robust because they were unaffected by estimation model.     

Heterogeneous Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Germany: Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment

ObjectivesColorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests differ in benefits, harms, and processes, making individual informed decisions preference based. The objective was to analyze the preferences of insurees in Germany for characteristics of CRC screening modalities.MethodsA generic discrete choice experiment with 2-alternative choice sets and 6 attributes (CRC mortality, CRC incidence, complications, preparation, need for transportation, and follow-up; 3 levels each) depicting characteristics of fecal testing, sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy was generated. Participants completed 8 choice tasks. Internal validity was tested using a within-set dominated pair. Between June and October 2020, written questionnaires were sent to a stratified random sample (n = 5000) of 50-, 55-, and 60-year-old insurees of the AOK (Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse) Lower Saxony, who had previously received an invitation to participate in the organized screening program including evidence-based information. Preferences were analyzed using conditional logit, mixed logit, and latent-class model.ResultsFrom 1282 questionnaires received (26% [1282 of 4945]), 1142 were included in the analysis. Approximately 42% of the respondents chose the dominated alternative in the internal validity test. Three heterogeneous preference classes were identified. Most important attributes were preparation (class 1; n = 505, 44%), CRC mortality (class 2; n = 347, 30%), and CRC incidence (class 3; n = 290, 25%). Contrary to a priori expectations, a higher effort was preferred for bowel cleansing (class 1) and accompaniment home (classes 1 and 2).ConclusionInternal validity issues of choice data need further research and warrant attention in future discrete choice experiment surveys. The observed preference heterogeneity suggests different informational needs, although the underlying reasons remained unclear.     

Mumps to COVID-19: Vaccinated persons remain vulnerable when community uptake is low

Vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) first became available in the United States and Europe outside clinical trials in December 2020, when administration began in high-priority populations such as healthcare workers and long-term care residents. [1] Since that time, global rollout progresses with wide variation in vaccination rates by country. [2] Depending upon product and SARS-CoV-2 variant, vaccine efficacies against infection range from approximately 70 to well over 90%, higher against severe disease. Well-resourced settings are starting to focus on booster doses among high risk persons, and locations with higher vaccination rates appear to have less COVID-19 patient and community impact. Yet, in every setting, primary vaccination to as many persons as possible remains incredibly important to effective pandemic risk management. Why this is the case, why even in settings with comparatively high vaccination rates and boosting we still should make the case that more primary vaccination matters can be answered by remembering mumps, and applying those lessons to promoting vaccine access.     

Heterogeneous Patient Preferences for Modern Antiretroviral Therapy: Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment

ObjectiveLimited data describe patient preferences for the growing number of antiretroviral therapies (ARTs). We quantified preferences for key characteristics of modern ART deemed relevant to shared decision making.MethodsA discrete choice experiment survey elicited preferences for ART characteristics, including dosing (frequency and number of pills), administration characteristics (pill size and meal requirement), most bothersome side effect (from diarrhea, sleep disturbance, headaches, dizziness/difficulty thinking, depression, or jaundice), and most bothersome long-term effect (from increased risk of heart attacks, bone fractures, renal dysfunction, hypercholesterolemia, or hyperglycemia). Between March and August 2017, the discrete choice experiment was fielded to 403 treatment-experienced persons living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), enrolled from 2 infectious diseases clinics in the southern United States and a national online panel. Participants completed 16 choice tasks, each comparing 3 treatment options. Preferences were analyzed using mixed and latent class logit models.ResultsMost participants were male (68%) and older (interquartile range: 42-58 years), and had substantial treatment experience (interquartile range: 7-21 years). In mixed logit analyses, all attributes were associated with preferences. Side and long-term effects were most important, with evidence of substantial preference heterogeneity. Latent class analysis identified 5 preference classes. For classes 1 (40%), 2 (24%), and 3 (21%), side effects were most important, followed by long-term effects. For class 4 (10%), dosing was most important. Class 5 (4%) was largely indifferent to ART characteristics.ConclusionOverall, treatment-experienced persons living with HIV valued minimizing side effects and long-term toxicities over dosing and administration characteristics. Preferences varied widely, highlighting the need to elicit individual patient preferences in models of shared antiretroviral decision making.     

Papers Please - Predictive Factors of National and International Attitudes Toward Immunity and Vaccination Passports: Online Representative Surveys

BackgroundIn response to the COVID-19 pandemic, countries are introducing digital passports that allow citizens to return to normal activities if they were previously infected with (immunity passport) or vaccinated against (vaccination passport) SARS-CoV-2. To be effective, policy decision-makers must know whether these passports will be widely accepted by the public and under what conditions. This study focuses attention on immunity passports, as these may prove useful in countries both with and without an existing COVID-19 vaccination program; however, our general findings also extend to vaccination passports.ObjectiveWe aimed to assess attitudes toward the introduction of immunity passports in six countries, and determine what social, personal, and contextual factors predicted their support.MethodsWe collected 13,678 participants through online representative sampling across six countries—Australia, Japan, Taiwan, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom—during April to May of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, and assessed attitudes and support for the introduction of immunity passports.ResultsImmunity passport support was moderate to low, being the highest in Germany (775/1507 participants, 51.43%) and the United Kingdom (759/1484, 51.15%); followed by Taiwan (2841/5989, 47.44%), Australia (963/2086, 46.16%), and Spain (693/1491, 46.48%); and was the lowest in Japan (241/1081, 22.94%). Bayesian generalized linear mixed effects modeling was used to assess predictive factors for immunity passport support across countries. International results showed neoliberal worldviews (odds ratio [OR] 1.17, 95% CI 1.13-1.22), personal concern (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00-1.16), perceived virus severity (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.14), the fairness of immunity passports (OR 2.51, 95% CI 2.36-2.66), liking immunity passports (OR 2.77, 95% CI 2.61-2.94), and a willingness to become infected to gain an immunity passport (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.51-1.68) were all predictive factors of immunity passport support. By contrast, gender (woman; OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.82-0.98), immunity passport concern (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.57-0.65), and risk of harm to society (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.67-0.76) predicted a decrease in support for immunity passports. Minor differences in predictive factors were found between countries and results were modeled separately to provide national accounts of these data.ConclusionsOur research suggests that support for immunity passports is predicted by the personal benefits and societal risks they confer. These findings generalized across six countries and may also prove informative for the introduction of vaccination passports, helping policymakers to introduce effective COVID-19 passport policies in these six countries and around the world.     

Current Health State Affected Patient Preferences More Than Disease Status: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Multiple Myeloma

ObjectivesTo examine how disease status and current health state influence treatment preferences of patients with multiple myeloma (MM).MethodsParticipants with MM from France, Germany, and the United Kingdom completed a web-based survey that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and EQ-5D assessment. The DCE elicited preferences for 8 attributes: increased life expectancy, increased time to relapse, pain, fatigue, risk of infection, administration (route and duration), frequency of administration, and monitoring. Multinomial logit models were used to analyze DCE preference data and to calculate life expectancy trade-offs.ResultsThree hundred participants with MM (newly diagnosed, transplant eligible, n = 108; newly diagnosed, transplant ineligible, n = 105; relapsed-refractory, n = 87) completed the survey. The most valued attributes were pain, fatigue, and increased life expectancy. Participants would want an additional 2.7 years of life expectancy (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.4-3.1 years) to tolerate extreme pain and an additional 2.0 years of life expectancy (95% CI 1.6-2.3 years) to tolerate constant fatigue. Participants in a better health state (third EQ-5D score quartile [0.897]) required less additional life expectancy than participants with a worse health state (first EQ-5D score quartile [0.662]) to tolerate extreme pain (2.3 years [95% CI 1.9-2.6 years] vs 3.0 years [95% CI 2.6-3.4 years]; P = .007). There was little difference in treatment preferences between newly diagnosed and relapsed-refractory patients for pain, fatigue, and increased life expectancy.ConclusionsCurrent health state influenced treatment preferences of patients with MM more than disease status and should be considered when making treatment decisions.     

Occupation,Worker Vulnerability,and COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake: Analysis of the Virus Watch prospective cohort study

BackgroundOccupational disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake can impact the effectiveness of vaccination programmes and introduce particular risk for vulnerable workers and those with high workplace exposure. This study aimed to investigate COVID-19 vaccine uptake by occupation, including for vulnerable groups and by occupational exposure status.MethodsWe used data from employed or self-employed adults who provided occupational information as part of the Virus Watch prospective cohort study (n = 19,595) and linked this to study-obtained information about vulnerability-relevant characteristics (age, medical conditions, obesity status) and work-related COVID-19 exposure based on the Job Exposure Matrix. Participant vaccination status for the first, second, and third dose of any COVID-19 vaccine was obtained based on linkage to national records and study records. We calculated proportions and Sison-Glaz multinomial 95% confidence intervals for vaccine uptake by occupation overall, by vulnerability-relevant characteristics, and by job exposure.FindingsVaccination uptake across occupations ranged from 89-96% for the first dose, 87–94% for the second dose, and 75–86% for the third dose, with transport, trade, service and sales workers persistently demonstrating the lowest uptake. Vulnerable workers tended to demonstrate fewer between-occupational differences in uptake than non-vulnerable workers, although clinically vulnerable transport workers (76%-89% across doses) had lower uptake than several other occupational groups (maximum across doses 86%–96%). Workers with low SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk had higher vaccine uptake (86%-96% across doses) than those with elevated or high risk (81–94% across doses).InterpretationDifferential vaccination uptake by occupation, particularly amongst vulnerable and highly-exposed workers, is likely to worsen occupational and related socioeconomic inequalities in infection outcomes. Further investigation into occupational and non-occupational factors influencing differential uptake is required to inform relevant interventions for future COVID-19 booster rollouts and similar vaccination programmes.     

U.S. public support for COVID-19 vaccine donation to low- and middle-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

As COVID-19 vaccines become available to the public, there will be a massive worldwide distribution effort. Vaccine distribution has historically been unequal primarily due to the inability of nations with developing economies to purchase enough vaccine to fully vaccinate their populations. Inequitable access to COVID-19 vaccines will not just cause humanitarian suffering, it will likely also be associated with increased economic suffering worldwide. This study focuses on the U.S. population and its beliefs about future COVID-19 vaccine donation by the U.S. to low- and middle-income countries.This study carried out a survey among 788 U.S. adults. Variables include demographics, COVID-19 vaccine priority status, COVID-19 vaccine donation beliefs, and Social Dominance Orientation.Analyses showed that older respondents were both less likely to endorse higher levels of COVID-19 vaccine donations and were more likely to want to wait until all in the U.S. who want the vaccine have received it; those who identified as Democrats were more likely to endorse higher levels of future COVID-19 vaccine donation than Republicans; and those scoring higher on SDO were both less likely to endorse higher levels of COVID-19 vaccine donations as well as more likely to want to wait until all in the U.S. who want the vaccine have received it. Policymakers, as well as healthcare providers and public health communication professionals, should give consideration to those messages most likely to engender support for global prevention efforts with each audience segment.     

全球新冠疫苗研发与接种策略进展

WHO于2023年5月5日宣布新型冠状病毒感染(corona virus disease 2019,COVID-19)疫情不再构成国际关注的突发公共卫生事件。全球疫情相对稳定,但是各国仍不能放松对COVID-19的警惕。接种新冠疫苗仍是有效的预防手段。本文主要围绕当前全球新冠疫苗研发进展、不同国家疫苗接种策略调整情况等进行对比分析,并结合WHO推荐对新冠疫苗接种策略的最新指导意见,分析探讨全球新冠疫苗研发及各国疫苗接种策略对我国的启示,提出适合我国国情的针对性疫苗接种建议。