Association between community-based self-reported COVID-19 symptoms and social deprivation explored using symptom tracker apps: A repeated cross-sectional study in Northern Ireland

Objectives: The aim of the study was to investigate the spatial and temporal relationships between the prevalence of COVID-19 symptoms in the community-level and area-level social deprivation. Design: Spatial mapping, generalised linear models, using time as a factor and spatial-lag models were used to explore the relationship between self-reported COVID-19 symptom prevalence as recorded through two smartphone symptom tracker apps and a range of socioeconomic factors using a repeated cross-sectional study design. Setting: In the community in Northern Ireland, UK. The analysis period included the earliest stages of non-pharmaceutical interventions and societal restrictions or \u27lockdown\u27 in 2020. Participants: Users of two smartphone symptom tracker apps recording self-reported health information who recorded their location as Northern Ireland, UK. Primary outcome measures: Population standardised self-reported COVID-19 symptoms and correlation between population standardised self-reported COVID-19 symptoms and area-level characteristics from measures of multiple deprivation including employment levels and population housing density, derived as the mean number of residents per household for each census super output area. Results: Higher self-reported prevalence of COVID-19 symptoms was associated with the most deprived areas (p \u3c 0.001) and with those areas with the lowest employment levels (p \u3c 0.001). Higher rates of self-reported COVID-19 symptoms within the age groups, 18-24 and 25-34 years were found within the most deprived areas during the earliest stages of non-pharmaceutical interventions and societal restrictions (\u27lockdown\u27). Conclusions: Through spatial regression of self-reporting COVID-19 smartphone data in the community, this research shows how a lens of social deprivation can deepen our understanding of COVID-19 transmission and prevention. Our findings indicate that social inequality, as measured by area-level deprivation, is associated with disparities in potential COVID-19 infection, with higher prevalence of self-reported COVID-19 symptoms in urban areas associated with area-level social deprivation, housing density and age

Risk of COVID-19 death in adults who received booster COVID-19 vaccinations in England

The emergence of the COVID-19 vaccination has been critical in changing the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. To ensure protection remains high in vulnerable groups booster vaccinations in the UK have been targeted based on age and clinical vulnerabilities. We undertook a national retrospective cohort study using data from the 2021 Census linked to electronic health records. We fitted cause-specific Cox models to examine the association between health conditions and the risk of COVID-19 death and all-other-cause death for adults aged 50-100-years in England vaccinated with a booster in autumn 2022. Here we show, having learning disabilities or Down Syndrome (hazard ratio=5.07;95% confidence interval=3.69-6.98), pulmonary hypertension or fibrosis (2.88;2.43-3.40), motor neuron disease, multiple sclerosis, myasthenia or Huntington’s disease (2.94, 1.82-4.74), cancer of blood and bone marrow (3.11;2.72-3.56), Parkinson’s disease (2.74;2.34-3.20), lung or oral cancer (2.57;2.04 to 3.24), dementia (2.64;2.46 to 2.83) or liver cirrhosis (2.65;1.95 to 3.59) was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 death. Individuals with cancer of the blood or bone marrow, chronic kidney disease, cystic fibrosis, pulmonary hypotension or fibrosis, or rheumatoid arthritis or systemic lupus erythematosus had a significantly higher risk of COVID-19 death relative to other causes of death compared with individuals who did not have diagnoses. Policy makers should continue to priorities vulnerable groups for subsequent COVID-19 booster doses to minimise the risk of COVID-19 death

Variations in COVID-19 vaccination uptake among people in receipt of psychotropic drugs: cross-sectional analysis of a national population-based prospective cohort

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has disproportionately affected people with mental health conditions.AimsWe investigated the association between receiving psychotropic drugs, as an indicator of mental health conditions, and COVID-19 vaccine uptake.MethodWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis of a prospective cohort of the Northern Ireland adult population using national linked primary care registration, vaccination, secondary care and pharmacy dispensing data. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses investigated the association between anxiolytic, antidepressant, antipsychotic, and hypnotic use and COVID-19 vaccination status, accounting for age, gender, deprivation and comorbidities. Receiving any COVID-19 vaccine was the primary outcome.ResultsThere were 1 433 814 individuals, of whom 1 166 917 received a COVID-19 vaccination. Psychotropic medications were dispensed to 267 049 people. In univariable analysis, people who received any psychotropic medication had greater odds of receiving COVID-19 vaccination: odds ratio (OR) = 1.42 (95% CI 1.41–1.44). However, after adjustment, psychotropic medication use was associated with reduced odds of vaccination (ORadj = 0.90, 95% CI 0.89–0.91). People who received anxiolytics (ORadj = 0.63, 95% CI 0.61–0.65), antipsychotics (ORadj = 0.75, 95% CI 0.73–0.78) and hypnotics (ORadj = 0.90, 95% CI 0.87–0.93) had reduced odds of being vaccinated. Antidepressant use was not associated with vaccination (ORadj = 1.02, 95% CI 1.00–1.03).ConclusionsWe found significantly lower odds of vaccination in people who were receiving treatment with anxiolytic and antipsychotic medications. There is an urgent need for evidence-based, tailored vaccine support for people with mental health conditions

Risk of COVID-19 death in adults who received booster COVID-19 vaccinations in England

The emergence of the COVID-19 vaccination has been critical in changing the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. To ensure protection remains high in vulnerable groups booster vaccinations in the UK have been targeted based on age and clinical vulnerabilities. We undertook a national retrospective cohort study using data from the 2021 Census linked to electronic health records. We fitted cause-specific Cox models to examine the association between health conditions and the risk of COVID-19 death and all-other-cause death for adults aged 50-100-years in England vaccinated with a booster in autumn 2022. Here we show, having learning disabilities or Down Syndrome (hazard ratio=5.07;95% confidence interval=3.69-6.98), pulmonary hypertension or fibrosis (2.88;2.43-3.40), motor neuron disease, multiple sclerosis, myasthenia or Huntington's disease (2.94, 1.82-4.74), cancer of blood and bone marrow (3.11;2.72-3.56), Parkinson's disease (2.74;2.34-3.20), lung or oral cancer (2.57;2.04 to 3.24), dementia (2.64;2.46 to 2.83) or liver cirrhosis (2.65;1.95 to 3.59) was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 death. Individuals with cancer of the blood or bone marrow, chronic kidney disease, cystic fibrosis, pulmonary hypotension or fibrosis, or rheumatoid arthritis or systemic lupus erythematosus had a significantly higher risk of COVID-19 death relative to other causes of death compared with individuals who did not have diagnoses. Policy makers should continue to priorities vulnerable groups for subsequent COVID-19 booster doses to minimise the risk of COVID-19 death

Adverse events after first and second doses of COVID-19 vaccination in England: a national vaccine surveillance platform self-controlled case series study

Objectives: To estimate the incidence of adverse events of interest (AEIs) after receiving their first and second doses of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations, and to report the safety profile differences between the different COVID-19 vaccines. Design: We used a self-controlled case series design to estimate the relative incidence (RI) of AEIs reported to the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners national sentinel network. We compared the AEIs that occurred seven days before and after receiving the COVID-19 vaccinations to background levels between 1 October 2020 and 12 September 2021. Setting: England, UK. Participants: Individuals experiencing AEIs after receiving first and second doses of COVID-19 vaccines. Main outcome measures: AEIs determined based on events reported in clinical trials and in primary care during post-license surveillance. Results: A total of 7,952,861 individuals were vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines within the study period. Among them, 781,200 individuals (9.82%) presented to general practice with 1,482,273 AEIs. Within the first seven days post-vaccination, 4.85% of all the AEIs were reported. There was a 3–7% decrease in the overall RI of AEIs in the seven days after receiving both doses of Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 (RI = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91–0.94) and 0.96; 95% CI: 0.94–0.98), respectively) and Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 (RI = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95–0.98) for both doses), but a 20% increase after receiving the first dose of Moderna mRNA-1273 (RI = 1.20; 95% CI: 1.00–1.44)). Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccines are associated with a small decrease in the incidence of medically attended AEIs. Sentinel networks could routinely report common AEI rates, which could contribute to reporting vaccine safety

Risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes after autumn 2022 COVID-19 booster vaccinations: a pooled analysis of national prospective cohort studies involving 7.4 million adults in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales

Background UK COVID-19 vaccination policy has evolved to offering COVID-19 booster doses to individuals at increased risk of severe Illness from COVID-19. Building on our analyses of vaccine effectiveness of first, second and initial booster doses, we aimed to identify individuals at increased risk of severe outcomes (i.e., COVID-19 related hospitalisation or death) post the autumn 2022 booster dose. Methods We undertook a national population-based cohort analysis across all four UK nations through linked primary care, vaccination, hospitalisation and mortality data. We included individuals who received autumn 2022 booster doses of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty) or mRNA-1273 (Spikevax) during the period September 1, 2022 to December 31, 2022 to investigate the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between demographic and clinical factors and severe COVID-19 outcomes after the autumn booster dose. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), deprivation, urban/rural areas and comorbidities. Stratified analyses were conducted by vaccine type. We then conducted a fixed-effect meta-analysis to combine results across the four UK nations. Findings Between September 1, 2022 and December 31, 2022, 7,451,890 individuals ≥18 years received an autumn booster dose. 3500 had severe COVID-19 outcomes (2.9 events per 1000 person-years). Being male (male vs female, aHR 1.41 (1.32–1.51)), older adults (≥80 years vs 18–49 years; 10.43 (8.06–13.50)), underweight (BMI <18.5 vs BMI 25.0–29.9; 2.94 (2.51–3.44)), those with comorbidities (≥5 comorbidities vs none; 9.45 (8.15–10.96)) had a higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation or death after the autumn booster dose. Those with a larger household size (≥11 people within household vs 2 people; 1.56 (1.23–1.98)) and from more deprived areas (most deprived vs least deprived quintile; 1.35 (1.21–1.51)) had modestly higher risks. We also observed at least a two-fold increase in risk for those with various chronic neurological conditions, including Down's syndrome, immunodeficiency, chronic kidney disease, cancer, chronic respiratory disease, or cardiovascular disease. Interpretation Males, older individuals, underweight individuals, those with an increasing number of comorbidities, from a larger household or more deprived areas, and those with specific underlying health conditions remained at increased risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and death after the autumn 2022 vaccine booster dose. There is now a need to focus on these risk groups for investigating immunogenicity and efficacy of further booster doses or therapeutics. Funding National Core Studies—Immunity, UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council and Economic and Social Research Council), Health Data Research UK, the Scottish Government, and the University of Edinburgh

Undervaccination and severe COVID-19 outcomes: meta-analysis of national cohort studies in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales

We thank Dave Kelly from Albasoft for his support with making primary care data available, and Lynn Morrice, Wendy Inglis Humphrey, and Laura Gonzalez Rienda for their support with project management and administration. This work uses data provided by patients and collected by the NHS as part of their care and support. We would also like to acknowledge all data providers who make anonymised data available for research. We wish to acknowledge the collaborative partnership that enabled acquisition and access to the de-identified data in Wales, which led to this output. The collaboration was led by the Swansea University Health Data Research UK team under the direction of the Welsh Government Technical Advisory Cell and includes the following groups and organisations: the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank, Administrative Data Research Wales, NHS Wales Informatics Service, Public Health Wales, NHS Shared Services Partnership, and the Welsh Ambulance Service Trust. All research conducted has been completed under the permission and approval of the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Independent Information Governance Review Panel (project number: 0911). We acknowledge the help provided by the staff of the Honest Broker Service (HBS) within the Business Services Organisation Northern Ireland (BSO). The HBS is funded by the BSO and the Department of Health. The authors alone are responsible for the interpretation of the data and any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the BSO. Research in Northern Ireland was conducted under approval by the HBS Governance Board approval number 064. KK is supported by the National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration East Midlands and Leicester Biomedical Research Centre. This work was supported by the UK Research and Innovation National Core Studies: Data and Connectivity (MC_PC_20029 or MC_PC_20058), with further support from Health Data Research UK (HDR UK), an initiative funded by UK Research and Innovation, Department of Health and Social Care (England) and the devolved administrations, and leading medical research charities. This work was also carried out with the support of the BHF Data Science Centre at HDR UK (SP/19/3/34678). This study makes use of de-identified data held in NHS England's Secure Data Environment service for England and made available via the BHF Data Science Centre's CVD-COVID-UK/COVID-IMPACT consortium. The BHF Data Science Centre (grant No SP/19/3/34678, awarded to HDR UK) funded co-development (with NHS England) of the trusted research environment, provision of linked datasets, data access, user software licences, computational usage, and data management and wrangling support, with additional contributions from the HDR UK Data and Connectivity component of the UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser's National Core Studies programme to coordinate national COVID-19 priority research. Consortium partner organisations funded the time of contributing data analysts, biostatisticians, epidemiologists, and clinicians.Peer reviewe

Severe COVID-19 outcomes after full vaccination of primary schedule and initial boosters : pooled analysis of national prospective cohort studies of 30 million individuals in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales

National Core Studies–Immunity, UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Health Data Research UK, the Scottish Government, and the University of Edinburgh.Peer reviewedPublisher PD