Propuesta de un plan de comunicación para fortalecer la imagen de la parroquia Baños del cantón Cuenca

Este proyecto de investigación tuvo como objetivo solucionar la brecha comunicacional referente a la imagen del GAD parroquial Baños, a través de la formulación de un plan de comunicación externa de fortalecimiento de la misma mediante estrategias de mejoramiento de las relaciones de los públicos que pertenecen a dicho sector, a fin de reflejar una transformación unificadora. Dicha problemática se abordó desde dos fases: el análisis documental y contextual que facilitó la investigación de la comunicación, canales y estrategias precedentes, y la fase de exploración de campo a través de la cual los públicos objetivo participaron activamente a través de sus aportes a la elaboración del proyecto. Este proceso abrió paso al plan cuyas conclusiones fueron: las estrategias digitales como medios prioritarios, el relacionamiento como táctica principal de las acciones a ejecutar, el carácter proactivo que debe presentar para no engancharse con particularidades e intereses políticos y sobre todo posicionar una visión del GAD parroquial como un conjunto que pondera equitativamente públicos y organización, para el establecimiento de metas comunes y estrategias de desarrollo social que se adecúen a las necesidades de las partes involucradas y las vinculen a la planificación de manera activa y participativa.This research project aimed to solve the communication gap concerning the image of the Baños parish GAD of Cuenca, through the formulation of an external communication plan to strengthen it through strategies to improve public relations that belong to said sector, in order to reflect a merging transformation. This problematic was taken from two phases: the documentary and contextual analysis that facilitated the investigation of communication, channels and preceding strategies, and the field exploration phase through which the target audiences actively participated through their contributions to the Development of the project. This process paved the way to the plan whose conclusions were: digital strategies as priority media, relationship as the main tactic of the executed actions, the proactive nature that must be presented so as not to get hooked on particularities and political interests and, above all, position a vision of the GAD as a group that equitably weighs public and organization, for the establishment of common goals and social development strategies that are adapted to the needs of the parties involved and link them to planning in an active and participatory manner.Licenciado en Ciencias de la Comunicación Social en Comunicación Organizacional y Relaciones PúblicasCuenc

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health