Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic; a systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies

BACKGROUND: A high COVID-19 vaccine uptake is essential to achieve herd immunity to combat the current strain of COVID-19 and potential future variants. This review aimed to identify factors associated with public intention to receive COVID-19 vaccines until February 2021 to provide accessible data to policymakers to inform framing and targeting of messages designed to optimise vaccine uptake. METHODS: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Sociological Abstracts and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts were searched for cross-sectional studies reporting data regarding COVID-19 vaccine intentions, published between 01/01/2020 and 12/02/2021. Title/abstract and full-text screening were performed independently by two authors. The Appraisal Tool for Cross-sectional Studies (AXIS) was used to assess bias and quality. Both random-effects meta-analysis and narrative synthesis were used to describe vaccine intentions and associated factors. A subgroup analysis assessing the impact of sex, sampling method and time of survey on COVID-19 vaccine intention was performed. RESULTS: Searches identified 4739 studies, and 23 cross-sectional studies were deemed eligible for the review; 22 used online surveys and one used a mixed-methods study design. Eighteen surveys were conducted in the first half of 2020 and five were conducted in the latter half of 2020. Fifteen countries were represented, with the most common being the United States (n = 4) and the United Kingdom (n = 4) sampling 41,403 participants across all surveys. Most studies employed convenience sampling and 11 non-responder rates raised concerns over non-response bias. From the 18 studies included in the meta-analysis, the pooled proportion of survey participants willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was 73.3% (n = 18, 95% Confidence Interval 64.2 to 81.5%, I(2) = 99.7%). Factors associated with a higher COVID-19 vaccine acceptance included greater perceived risk of COVID-19, lower level of perceived vaccine harm, higher educational attainment and household income, older age, being of White ethnicity and male sex. CONCLUSIONS: There was a high willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine which was influenced by sociodemographic factors and risk perceptions. The findings suggest future research should explore reasoning behind vaccine intentions for different sociodemographic groups to allow targeted communication strategies to be formulated by public health agencies. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42021239134. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-14029-4

Adaptations in clinical examinations of medical students in response to the COVID-19 pandemic:a systematic review

INTRODUCTION: Clinical examinations (assessments) are integral to ensuring that medical students can treat patients safely and effectively. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted traditional formats of clinical examinations. This prompted Medical Schools to adapt their approaches to conducting these examinations to make them suitable for delivery in the pandemic. This systematic review aims to identify the approaches that Medical Schools, internationally, adopted in adapting their clinical examinations of medical students in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Three databases and four key medical education journals were systematically searched up to 22 October 2021; a grey literature search was also undertaken. Two reviewers independently screened at title, abstract stage and full text stage against predefined eligibility criteria. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion and involvement of senior authors. Risk of bias assessment was performed using an adapted version of a pre-existing risk of bias assessment tool for medical education developments. Results were summarised in a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 36 studies were included, which documented the approaches of 48 Medical Schools in 17 countries. Approaches were categorised into in-person clinical examinations (22 studies) or online clinical examinations (14 studies). Authors of studies reporting in-person clinical examinations described deploying enhanced infection control measures along with modified patient participation. Authors of studies reporting online clinical examinations described using online software to create online examination circuits. All authors reported that adapted examinations were feasible, scores were comparable to previous years’ student cohorts, and participant feedback was positive. Risk of bias assessment highlighted heterogeneity in reporting of the clinical examinations. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified two broad approaches to adapting clinical examinations in the pandemic: in-person and online. Authors reported it was feasible to conduct clinical examinations in the pandemic where medical educators are given sufficient time and resources to carefully plan and introduce suitable adaptations. However, the risk of bias assessment identified few studies with high reporting quality, which highlights the need for a common framework for reporting of medical education developments to enhance reproducibility across wider contexts. Our review provides medical educators with the opportunity to reflect on past practises and facilitate the design and planning of future examinations

Immunogenicity of BNT162b2 Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant and Attitudes toward a COVID-19 Booster Dose among Healthy Thai Adolescents

Despite the BNT162b2 vaccination coverage, rapid transmission of Omicron SARS-CoV-2 has occurred, which is suspected to be due to the immune escape of the variant or waning vaccine efficacy of multiple BNT162b2 vaccination doses. Our study aims to compare immunogenicity against Omicron prior to and post a booster dose of BNT162b2 in healthy adolescents, and to evaluate their attitudes toward booster dose vaccination. A cross sectional study was conducted among healthy adolescents aged 12–17 who received two doses of BNT162b2 more than 5 months ago. Participants and their guardians performed self-reported questionnaires regarding reasons for receiving the booster. A 30 ug booster dose of BNT162b2 was offered. Immunogenicity was evaluated by a surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) against the Omicron variant, and anti-spike-receptor-binding-domain IgG (anti-S-RBD IgG) taken pre-booster and 14-days post-booster. From March to April 2022, 120 healthy Thai adolescents with a median age of 15 years (IQR 14–16) were enrolled. sVNT against Omicron pre- and post-booster had 11.9 (95%CI 0–23.9) and 94.3 (90.6–97.4) % inhibition. Geometric means (GMs) of anti-S-RBD IgG increased from 837 (728, 953) to 3041 (2893, 3229) BAU/mL. Major reasons to receive the booster vaccination were perceived as vaccine efficacy, reduced risk of spreading infection to family, and safe resumption of social activities. A booster dose of BNT162b2 elicits high immunogenicity against the Omicron variant. Motivation for receiving booster doses is to reduce risk of infection