Decision-making on childhood vaccination by highly educated parents

OBJECTIVE To analyze the sociocultural aspects involved in the decision-making process of vaccination in upper-class and highly educated families. METHODS A qualitative approach based on in-depth interviews with 15 couples from the city of Sao Paulo, Southeastern Brazil, falling into three categories: vaccinators, late or selective vaccinators, and nonvaccinators. The interpretation of produced empirical material was performed through content analysis. RESULTS The study showed diverse and particular aspects surrounding the three groups’ decisions whether to vaccinate their children. The vaccinators’ decision to vaccinate their children was spontaneous and raised no questions. Most late or selective vaccinators experienced a wide range of situations that were instrumental in the decision to delay or not apply certain vaccines. The nonvaccinator’s decision-making process expressed a broader context of both criticism of hegemonic obstetric practices in Brazil and access to information transmitted via social networks and the internet. The data showed that the problematization of vaccines (culminating in the decision to not vaccinate their children) occurred in the context of humanized birth, was protagonized by women and was greatly influenced by health information from the internet. CONCLUSIONS Sociocultural aspects of the singular Brazilian context and the contemporary society were involved in the decision-making on children’s vaccination. Understanding this process can provide a real basis for a deeper reflection on health and immunization practices in Brazil in light of the new contexts and challenges of the world today

SARS-CoV-2-specific nasal IgA wanes 9 months after hospitalisation with COVID-19 and is not induced by subsequent vaccination

Background Most studies of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 focus on circulating antibody, giving limited insights into mucosal defences that prevent viral replication and onward transmission. We studied nasal and plasma antibody responses one year after hospitalisation for COVID-19, including a period when SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was introduced. Methods In this follow up study, plasma and nasosorption samples were prospectively collected from 446 adults hospitalised for COVID-19 between February 2020 and March 2021 via the ISARIC4C and PHOSP-COVID consortia. IgA and IgG responses to NP and S of ancestral SARS-CoV-2, Delta and Omicron (BA.1) variants were measured by electrochemiluminescence and compared with plasma neutralisation data. Findings Strong and consistent nasal anti-NP and anti-S IgA responses were demonstrated, which remained elevated for nine months (p < 0.0001). Nasal and plasma anti-S IgG remained elevated for at least 12 months (p < 0.0001) with plasma neutralising titres that were raised against all variants compared to controls (p < 0.0001). Of 323 with complete data, 307 were vaccinated between 6 and 12 months; coinciding with rises in nasal and plasma IgA and IgG anti-S titres for all SARS-CoV-2 variants, although the change in nasal IgA was minimal (1.46-fold change after 10 months, p = 0.011) and the median remained below the positive threshold determined by pre-pandemic controls. Samples 12 months after admission showed no association between nasal IgA and plasma IgG anti-S responses (R = 0.05, p = 0.18), indicating that nasal IgA responses are distinct from those in plasma and minimally boosted by vaccination. Interpretation The decline in nasal IgA responses 9 months after infection and minimal impact of subsequent vaccination may explain the lack of long-lasting nasal defence against reinfection and the limited effects of vaccination on transmission. These findings highlight the need to develop vaccines that enhance nasal immunity. Funding This study has been supported by ISARIC4C and PHOSP-COVID consortia. ISARIC4C is supported by grants from the National Institute for Health and Care Research and the Medical Research Council. Liverpool Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre provided infrastructure support for this research. The PHOSP-COVD study is jointly funded by UK Research and Innovation and National Institute of Health and Care Research. The funders were not involved in the study design, interpretation of data or the writing of this manuscript

SARS-CoV-2-specific nasal IgA wanes 9 months after hospitalisation with COVID-19 and is not induced by subsequent vaccination

Data sharing statement This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license The ISARIC4C protocol, data sharing and publication policy are available at https://isaric4c.net. ISARIC4C's Independent Data and Material Access Committee welcomes applications for access to data and materials (https://isaric4c.net). The PHOSP-COVID protocol, consent form, definition and derivation of clinical characteristics and outcomes, training materials, regulatory documents, information about requests for data access, and other relevant study materials are available online: https://phosp.org/resource/. Access to these materials can be granted by contacting [email protected] and [email protected]. All data used in this study is available within ODAP and accessible under reasonable request. Data access criteria and information about how to request access is available online: https://phosp.org/resource/. If criteria are met and a request is made, access can be gained by signing the eDRIS user agreement.Supplementary data are available online at https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964(22)00584-9/fulltext#supplementaryMaterial .Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Background: Most studies of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 focus on circulating antibody, giving limited insights into mucosal defences that prevent viral replication and onward transmission. We studied nasal and plasma antibody responses one year after hospitalisation for COVID-19, including a period when SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was introduced. Methods: In this follow up study, plasma and nasosorption samples were prospectively collected from 446 adults hospitalised for COVID-19 between February 2020 and March 2021 via the ISARIC4C and PHOSP-COVID consortia. IgA and IgG responses to NP and S of ancestral SARS-CoV-2, Delta and Omicron (BA.1) variants were measured by electrochemiluminescence and compared with plasma neutralisation data. Findings: Strong and consistent nasal anti-NP and anti-S IgA responses were demonstrated, which remained elevated for nine months (p < 0.0001). Nasal and plasma anti-S IgG remained elevated for at least 12 months (p < 0.0001) with plasma neutralising titres that were raised against all variants compared to controls (p < 0.0001). Of 323 with complete data, 307 were vaccinated between 6 and 12 months; coinciding with rises in nasal and plasma IgA and IgG anti-S titres for all SARS-CoV-2 variants, although the change in nasal IgA was minimal (1.46-fold change after 10 months, p = 0.011) and the median remained below the positive threshold determined by pre-pandemic controls. Samples 12 months after admission showed no association between nasal IgA and plasma IgG anti-S responses (R = 0.05, p = 0.18), indicating that nasal IgA responses are distinct from those in plasma and minimally boosted by vaccination. Interpretation: The decline in nasal IgA responses 9 months after infection and minimal impact of subsequent vaccination may explain the lack of long-lasting nasal defence against reinfection and the limited effects of vaccination on transmission. These findings highlight the need to develop vaccines that enhance nasal immunity. Funding: This study has been supported by ISARIC4C and PHOSP-COVID consortia. ISARIC4C is supported by grants from the National Institute for Health and Care Research and the Medical Research Council. Liverpool Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre provided infrastructure support for this research. The PHOSP-COVD study is jointly funded by UK Research and Innovation and National Institute of Health and Care Research. The funders were not involved in the study design, interpretation of data or the writing of this manuscript.This work is supported by the following grants: The PHOSP-COVD study is jointly funded by UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health and Care Research (grant references: MR/V027859/1 and COV0319). ISARIC4C is supported by grants from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (award CO-CIN-01) and the Medical Research Council (grant MC_PC_19059) Liverpool Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre provided infrastructure support for this research (grant reference: C18616/A25153). Other grants which have supported this work include: the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium [funder reference:1257927], the Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (NIHR Imperial BRC, grant IS-BRC-1215-20013), the Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London and NIHR HPRU in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool, both in partnership with Public Health England, [NIHR award 200907], Wellcome Trust and Department for International Development [215091/Z/18/Z], Health Data Research UK (HDR UK) [grant code: 2021.0155], Medical Research Council [grant code: MC_UU_12014/12], and NIHR Clinical Research Network for providing infrastructure support for this research. FL is supported by an MRC clinical training fellowship [award MR/W000970/1]. LPH is supported by Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. AART is supported by a BHF Intermediate Clinical Fellowship (FS/18/13/33281). SLRJ receives support from UKRI, GCRF, Rosetrees Trust, BHIVA, EDCTP, Globvac. JDC has grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead Sciences, Grifols, Novartis and Insmed. RAE holds a NIHR Clinician Scientist Fellowship (CS-2016-16-020). AH is currently supported by UK Research and Innovation. NIHR and NIHR Manchester BRC. BR receives support from BHF Oxford Centre of Research Excellence, NIHR Oxford BRC and MRC. SJD is funded by an NIHR Global Research Professorship [NIHR300791]. DW is supported by an NIHR Advanced Fellowship. AH has received support from MRC and the Coronavirus Immunology Consortium (MR/V028448/1). LVW has received support from UKRI, GSK/Asthma + Lung UK and NIHR for this study. MGS has received support from NIHR UK, MRC UK and Health Protection Research Unit in Emerging & Zoonotic Infections, University of Liverpool. JKB is supported by the Wellcome Trust (223164/Z/21/Z) and UKRI (MC_PC_20004, MC_PC_19025, MC_PC_1905, MRNO2995X/1, and MC_PC_20029). PJMO is supported by a NIHR Senior Investigator Award [award 201385]. LT is supported by the Wellcome Trust [clinical career development fellowship grant number 205228/Z/16/Z], the Centre of Excellence in Infectious Diseases Research (CEIDR) and the Alder Hey Charity

Sintomas psicóticos e cognitivos associados à busca de tratamento por dependentes de substâncias: um estudo qualitativo Psychotic and cognitive symptoms associated to treatment seeking behavior: a qualitative study

Há algumas décadas, busca-se compreender melhor o processo subjacente ao comportamento de procura de tratamento por usuários que fazem uso nocivo ou são dependentes de substâncias psicoativas. Os modelos atualmente propostos baseiam-se principalmente na análise epidemiológica de certas características individuais quanto ao poder que têm de influenciar esse comportamento de disposição para tratamento. OBJETIVOS: Interpretar e compreender possíveis significados pessoais associados a alterações psicopatológicas, sobre como podem se relacionar à procura de tratamento, na visão dos próprios pacientes. MÉTODO: Pesquisa qualitativa com entrevistas semidirigidas com amostra intencional de 13 dependentes de substâncias que procuraram tratamento. RESULTADOS: Houve relatos espontâneos de alterações de forma, curso e conteúdo de pensamento e juízo de realidade, alterações de sensopercepção, de atenção, memória e linguagem. Os membros da amostra pareceram relacioná-las à motivação para tratamento. Os dados foram interpretados considerando o contexto psicocultural dos entrevistados e seus quadros clínicos de síndrome de dependência, de abstinência e de comorbidade. CONCLUSÕES: Pesquisas qualitativas contribuem para aprimorar os modelos explicativos sobre procura de tratamento por dependentes de substâncias. Investigar clinicamente alterações psicopatológicas parece poder contribuir para motivar pacientes para tratamentos específicos do uso disfuncional de substâncias.<br>During the last few decades it is aimed to better understand the process underlying treatment seeking behavior by harmful or dependent psychoactive substances users. The currently proposed models are mainly based on the epidemiological analysis of certain number of individual characteristics, as they have the power to influence this behavior of readiness for treatment. OBJECTIVES: To interpret and understand possible personal meanings associated with psychopathological disorders and how they can be related to treatment seeking behavior, as described by the patients themselves. METHOD: Qualitative study conducted on an intentional sample of 13 substance dependents seeking for formal treatment; in-depth semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: The participants spontaneously reported: shape, course and content thought disturbances and sense of reality, sensory perception disorders, and attention, memory and language deficits. The sample's participants seemed to relate these disorders to the treatment seeking motivations. The data were interpreted considering the interviewees' psycho-cultural context their clinical presentations (dependence or withdrawal syndromes and comorbidities). CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative research contribute to improve current models of substance dependents' treatment seeking behavior. The clinical investigation of psychopathologic disorders seem to motivate patients to specific treatments of dysfunctional use of substances