METHODS: A nationwide cross-sectional, self-administered online survey was conducted on 1-19 May 2020. The health belief model (HBM) was used as a theoretical framework for understanding COVID-19 vaccination intent and WTP.
RESULTS: A total of 3,541 complete responses were received. The majority reported a probably yes intent (54.6%), followed by a definite yes intent (28.7%). The perception that vaccination decreases the chances of getting COVID-19 under the perceived benefit construct (OR = 3.14, 95% CI 2.05-4.83) and not being concerned about the efficacy of new COVID-19 vaccines under the perceived barriers construct (OR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.31-2.09) were found to have the highest significant odds of a definite intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) of WTP for COVID-19 vaccine was CNY¥200/US$28 (IQR CNY¥100-500/USD$14-72). The highest marginal WTP for the vaccine was influenced by socio-economic factors. The majority were confident (48.7%) and completely confident (46.1%) in domestically-made COVID-19 vaccine. 64.2% reported a preference for a domestically-made over foreign-made COVID-19 vaccine.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate the utility of HBM constructs in understanding COVID-19 vaccination intent and WTP. It is important to improve health promotion and reduce the barriers to COVID-19 vaccination.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The qualitative software QSR-NVivo 10 was used to manage, code, and analyse the data.
RESULTS: The analyses uncovered several major issues concerning COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The production of the COVID-19 vaccine at an unprecedented speed evoked the fear of skipping steps that would compromise vaccine safety. The unknown long-term effects and duration of protection erode confidence in taking the vaccines. There were also persistent concerns with regard to vaccine compositions that could be harmful or contain aborted foetal cells. The rate of COVID-19 death was viewed as low. Many interpreted the 95% effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine as insufficient. Preference for immunity gains from having an infection was viewed as more effective. Peer-reviewed publication-based data were favoured as a source of trust in vaccination decision-making.
CONCLUSIONS: The anti-COVID-19 vaccine sentiments found in this study provide important insights for the formulation of public health messages to instill confidence in the vaccines.
METHODS: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was conducted between 4 January and 5 March 2021 in 17 countries worldwide. Proportions and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and vaccine characteristics influencing vaccination acceptance were generated and compared across countries and regions. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.
RESULTS: Of the 19,714 responses received, 90.4% (95% CI 81.8-95.3) reported likely or extremely likely to receive COVID-19 vaccine. A high proportion of likely or extremely likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was reported in Australia (96.4%), China (95.3%) and Norway (95.3%), while a high proportion reported being unlikely or extremely unlikely to receive the vaccine in Japan (34.6%), the U.S. (29.4%) and Iran (27.9%). Males, those with a lower educational level and those of older age expressed a higher level of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Less than two-thirds (59.7%; 95% CI 58.4-61.0) reported only being willing to accept a vaccine with an effectiveness of more than 90%, and 74.5% (95% CI 73.4-75.5) said they would accept a COVID-19 vaccine with minor adverse reactions. A total of 21.0% (95% CI 20.0-22.0) reported not accepting an mRNA vaccine and 51.8% (95% CI 50.3-53.1) reported that they would only accept a COVID-19 vaccine from a specific country-of-origin. Countries from the Southeast Asia region reported the highest proportion of not accepting mRNA technology. The highest proportion from Europe and the Americas would only accept a vaccine produced by certain countries. The foremost important vaccine characteristic influencing vaccine choice is adverse reactions (40.6%; 95% CI 39.3-41.9) of a vaccine and effectiveness threshold (35.1%; 95% CI 33.9-36.4).
CONCLUSIONS: The inter-regional and individual country disparities in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy highlight the importance of designing an efficient plan for the delivery of interventions dynamically tailored to the local population.
METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double dummy, blinded, randomized controlled trial of patients recruited by convenience sampling in academic hospitals undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Between September 17, 2019, and November 28, 2023, a total of 3242 patients from 16 hospitals in 6 countries were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive either intravenous tranexamic acid (control) through surgery or topical tranexamic acid (treatment) at the end of surgery. The primary outcome was seizure, and the secondary outcome was red blood cell transfusion. After the last planned interim analysis-when 75% of anticipated participants had completed follow up-the Data and Safety Monitoring Board recommended to terminate the trial, and upon unblinding, the Operations Committee stopped the trial for safety.
RESULTS: Among 3242 randomized patients (mean age, 66.0 years; 77.7% male), in-hospital seizure occurred in 4 of 1624 patients (0.2%) in the topical group and in 11 of 1628 patients (0.7%) in the intravenous group (absolute risk difference, -0.5%; 95% CI, -0.9 to 0.03; P = .07). Red blood cell transfusion occurred in 570 patients (35.1%) in the topical group and in 433 (26.8%) in the intravenous group (absolute risk difference, 8.3%; 95% CI, 5.2 to 11.5; P = .007). The absolute risk difference in transfusion of ≥4 units of red blood cells in the topical group compared to the intravenous group was 8.2% (95% CI, 3.4 to 12.9).
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients having cardiac surgery, topical administration of tranexamic acid resulted in an 8.3% absolute increase in transfusion without reducing the incidence of seizure, compared to intravenous tranexamic acid.
METHODS: We harmonized longitudinal data of 11,988 participants from 10 cohorts in eight countries to examine the dose-response relationship between late-life physical activity and incident dementia among older adults.
RESULTS: Using no physical activity as a reference, dementia risk decreased with duration of physical activity up to 3.1 to 6.0 hours/week (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 to 1.15 for 0.1 to 3.0 hours/week; HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.89 for 3.1 to 6.0 hours/week), but plateaued with higher duration. For the amount of physical activity, a similar pattern of dose-response curve was observed, with an inflection point of 9.1 to 18.0 metabolic equivalent value (MET)-hours/week (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.22 for 0.1 to 9.0 MET-hours/week; HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.93 for 9.1 to 18.0 MET-hours/week).
DISCUSSION: This cross-national analysis suggests that performing 3.1 to 6.0 hours of physical activity and expending 9.1 to 18.0/MET-hours of energy per week may reduce dementia risk.
METHODS: A total of 29,850 participants (58% women) from 21 cohorts across six continents were included in an individual participant data meta-analysis. Sex-specific hazard ratios (HRs), and women-to-men ratio of hazard ratios (RHRs) for associations between RFs and all-cause dementia were derived from mixed-effect Cox models.
RESULTS: Incident dementia occurred in 2089 (66% women) participants over 4.6 years (median). Women had higher dementia risk (HR, 1.12 [1.02, 1.23]) than men, particularly in low- and lower-middle-income economies. Associations between longer education and former alcohol use with dementia risk (RHR, 1.01 [1.00, 1.03] per year, and 0.55 [0.38, 0.79], respectively) were stronger for men than women; otherwise, there were no discernible sex differences in other RFs.
DISCUSSION: Dementia risk was higher in women than men, with possible variations by country-level income settings, but most RFs appear to work similarly in women and men.