Analysis of people previously considered to be clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV) in England during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, including their behaviours and mental and physical well-being.

The British Red Cross COVID-19 Vulnerability Index identifies areas in the UK where people might be more vulnerable to the effects of Covid-19. The Index looks at clinical vulnerability, wider health and wellbeing, and socioeconomic vulnerability.Click here for more details.The data sources for this application are as follows:British Red Cross Vulnerability Index by Local Authority DistrictBritish Red Cross COVID-19 Vulnerability Index by Middle Super Output Area (MSOA) in EnglandBritish Red Cross COVID-19 Vulnerability Index by Middle Super Output Area (MSOA) in WalesBritish Red Cross COVID-19 Vulnerability Index by Intermediate Zone in ScotlandBritish Red Cross COVID-19 Vulnerability Index by Super Output Area in Northern IrelandIndex of Multiple Deprivation 2015 (England)Index of Multiple Deprivation 2016 (Scotland)

Comparing the full and the simple model.

This dataset comprises data on new and accumulated confirmed cases and death episodes for each Brazilian municipality, by epidemiological week.

Criteria used for confirmed cases (mild and moderate cases): * Laboratory * Clinical epidemiological * Clinical criterion * Clinical image Death episodes refer to COVID-19 confirmed cases that progressed to death. Reference date for cases: * symptom onset date (preferably) * notification or testing date (for missing data) Reference date for deaths: * death or case closing date * notification or testing date (for missing data) Age groups follow a five-year window. Phase and peak variables according to the epidemiological week in which the cases and deaths occurred.

This dataset was used as part project - Evaluating Effects of Social Inequalities on the COVID-19 Pandemic in Brazil. Maria Yury Ichihara and colleagues at the Centre for Data and Knowledge Integration for Health (Cidacs) at Fiocruz in Brazil created a social disparities index to measure inequalities relevant to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as unequal access to healthcare, to identify regions that are more vulnerable to infection and to better focus prevention efforts.

In Brazil, markers of inequality are associated with COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. They developed the index with available COVID-19 surveillance data, hosted on the Cidacs platform, and built a public data visualisation dashboard to share the index and patterns of COVID-19 incidence and mortality with the broader community. This enabled health managers and policymakers to monitor the pandemic situation in the most vulnerable populations and target social and health interventions.

Permissions to use this dataset must be obtained from the Ministry of Health Brazil.

Characteristics and LoS of 538 COVID-19 confirmed cases admitted to hospital.

Correlation between clinical variables and patients’ vulnerability during the pandemic period.

Demographic and clinical characteristics of hospitalized COVID-19 patients by racial category (N = 106,962) for the complete case analysis.

Indicators from the Opinions and Lifestyle Survey (OPN) between 10 December 2020 and 10 January 2021, to understand attitudes to coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines between different sub-groups. Includes breakdowns by priority group, age and sex, region, health condition, clinically extremely vulnerable, disability and ethnicity.

The data includes demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic variables of hospitalised SRAS-CoV-2 infections in Brazil from February 2020 to November 2021.

Headline indicators from the Opinions and Lifestyle Survey covering the period 1 December 2021 to 3 January 2022 by disability and clinically extremely vulnerable status.

“0” =“Yes, “1” = No. For the purpose of deidentification, we included age range of the patients. Institutional Living is defined as living at an assisted living facility or at a rehabilitation facility. Antipsychotics: patients who were prescribed at least one antipsychotic medication at the time of COVID-19 infection to treat preexisting behavioral health disorders. Antidepressants: patients who were prescribed at least one antipsychotic medication at the time of COVID-19 infection. CGI-S: Clinical Global Impression severity scales. T0_CGI:_CGI-S scales from September 1st 2019 to the date of COVID-19 infection (pre-COVID); T1_CGI: CGI-S scales from the date of COVID-19 till October 22nd 2020 (post-COVID). SD: standard deviation. IQR .25: the 25% bound of Interquartile range. IQR .75: the 75% bound of Interquartile range. (XLSX)

Executive summary

The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV2 (COVID-19), first detected by Wuhan Municipal Health Commission, China, in Wuhan, Hubei Province in December 2020 and eventually the disease became pandemic. It was declared as Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) by WHO in January 2020. The COVID-19 disease primarily spreads through droplets of saliva or discharge from the nose when an infected person coughs or sneezes. People infected with the COVID-19 virus experiences mild, moderate or serious respiratory illness.

Health workers play a critical role in the clinical management of patients with COVID-19 and hence are likely to be the most vulnerable for contracting the disease. Therefore, investigating the extent of infection in health care settings and identifying risk factors for infection among health workers along with follow-up within a facility in which a confirmed case of COVID-19 infection is receiving care can provide useful information on virus transmissibility and routes of transmission, and will bear important step in limiting amplification events in health care facilities.

Objectives:

1. To find out the extent of human-to-human transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 infection among health workers
2. To study the clinical presentations of COVID-19 infection and the risk factors for infection among health workers. 3 To evaluate the effectiveness of infection prevention and control measures among health workers in protecting against COVID-19.
3. To evaluate the effectiveness of infection prevention and control programmes at health facility level
4. To determine the serological response of health workers with symptomatic and possibly asymptomatic COVID-19 infection.

Materials and Methods:

This was a prospective cohort study conducted over a period of seven months, from December 2020 to June 2021, the period covering India’s deadly second wave of COVID-19 pandemic. This was done among the health care workers working in HIMSR & HAHC hospital, a tertiary health care setting (Dedicated COVID-19 Hospital) providing care to patients with a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection. This hospital located in South East Delhi has 200 bedded COVID-19 Care Hospital and 1050 registered healthcare workers who come in contact with COVID-19-infected persons. The study population (sampling frame) included all the health personnel like doctors, nurses, paramedical staff, housekeeping staff, security staff, students of medical, nursing and paramedical sciences and other front office staff who come in contact with the patients. In this study, the first visit / interview (Baseline) was done when the staff came in contact with a confirmed COVID-19 case. The second visit / interview (Endline) was done between 22-28 days. During each of these two visits, biological sample in the form of serum was collected to check the presence of anti-COVID-19 antibodies

Results:

A total of 192 HCW were recruited in this study. All of them were interviewed and blood was collected for serology at the baseline visit as well as at endline. Out of 192 participants, 119 (61.97%) were detected with SARS-CoV2 antibodies at baseline whereas 73 (38.02%) were seronegative. Again, on22-28 days of follow-up, the seropositivity was 77.7% at the endline. We found that seropositivity was significantly and negatively associated with doctor as profession [OR:0.353, CI:0.176-0.710], COVID-19 symptoms [OR:0.210, CI:0.054-0.820], comorbidities [OR:0.139 , CI: 0.029 - 0.674], recent IPC Training [OR:0.250, CI:0.072 -0.864] , while positively associated with Partially [OR:3.303,CI: 1.256-8.685], as well as fully Vaccinated for COVID-19 [OR:2.428, CI:1.118-5.271]. We also observed seroconversion among 36.7% while 64.0% had increase in titre of antibodies during our follow-up period. The seroconversion was 63.2% in doctors, 42.9% in nurses and 13.0% in paramedics staff. Seroconversion was positively associated with doctor as profession [OR:11.43, CI:2.47 - 52.79] and with partially, as well as fully vaccinated for COVID-19 [OR: 32.63, CI: 5.11 - 208.49]. None of the HCW who were smokers and with any comorbidity did not found to have been seroconversion. We observe a negative and significant relationship of increase in titre of antibodies with recent any ILI symptoms [OR:0.17, 0.13 - 0.94], smokers[OR: 0.35, 95%CI: 0.13 - 0.94], HCW with comorbidities [OR:0.08,95CI: 0.01 - 0.71],, recent full IPC Training [OR:0.07, CI:0.01 -0.63] , while positively associated with partially [OR: 7.87, 95CI: 2.18 - 28.40)], as well as fully Vaccinated for COVID-19 [OR: 3.59, 95CI: 1.46 - 8.87]. Majority of the health care worker enrolled in our study had close contact exposure with COVID-19 patients while 5 had indirect exposure. It was observed that almost all (100% in both) doctors and nurses as well as almost all paramedical staff (99%) were wearing some kind of personal protective equipment (PPE) when they were exposed to a COVID-19 patient. We did not found adherences to any of the infection prevention measure adopted by the enrolled HCW during the recent contact with COVID-19 patients to be significantly associated with seroconversion.

Conclusion:

Majority of the health care worker (67% doctor, 80% nurses & 55% paramedics) enrolled in our study had close contact exposure with COVID-19 patient. The results show that among 192 HCW enrolled, 62% were seropositive at the baseline. At end line the seropositivity was increased to 77.7%. The seroconversion rate was also studied. It was found to be 36.7% in our study population (63.2% in doctors, 42.9% in nurses and 13.0% in paramedic’s staff.). Adherence to the recommended IPC measures was reported by most participants. About two third (63%) of the HCW in our study were not vaccinated against COVID-19; nurses and paramedics were higher in proportion among those who were unvaccinated. Fifteen percentage were partially vaccinated and 22% were fully vaccinated against COVID-19, with doctors comprising majority among them. We also found that vaccination had the strongest association with seropositivity, seroconversion as well as serial rise of titre.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

The UCL COVID-19 Social Study at University College London (UCL) was launched on 21 March 2020. Led by Dr Daisy Fancourt and Professor Andrew Steptoe from the Department of Behavioural Science and Health, the team designed the study to track in real-time the psychological and social impact of the virus across the UK.

The study quickly became the largest in the country, growing to over 70,000 participants and providing rare and privileged insight into the effects of the pandemic on people’s daily lives. Through our participants’ remarkable two-year commitment to the study, 1.2 million surveys were collected over 105 weeks, and over 100 scientific papers and 44 public reports were published.

During COVID-19, population mental health has been affected both by the intensity of the pandemic (cases and death rates), but also by lockdowns and restrictions themselves. Worsening mental health coincided with higher rates of COVID-19, tighter restrictions, and the weeks leading up to lockdowns. Mental health then generally improved during lockdowns and most people were able to adapt and manage their well-being. However, a significant proportion of the population suffered disproportionately to the rest, and stay-at-home orders harmed those who were already financially, socially, or medically vulnerable. Socioeconomic factors, including low SEP, low income, and low educational attainment, continued to be associated with worse experiences of the pandemic. Outcomes for these groups were worse throughout many measures including mental health and wellbeing; financial struggles;self-harm and suicide risk; risk of contracting COVID-19 and developing long Covid; and vaccine resistance and hesitancy. These inequalities existed before the pandemic and were further exacerbated by COVID-19, and such groups remain particularly vulnerable to the future effects of the pandemic and other national crises.

Further information, including reports and publications, can be found on the UCL COVID-19 Social Study website.

The study asked baseline questions on the following:

• Demographics, including year of birth, sex, ethnicity, relationship status, country of dwelling, urban/rural dwelling, type of accommodation, housing tenure, number of adults and children in the household, household income, education, employment status, pet ownership, and personality.
• Health and health behaviours, including pre-existing physical health conditions, diagnosed mental health conditions, pregnancy, smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, caring responsibilities, usual social behaviours, and social network size.

It also asked repeated questions at every wave on the following:

• COVID-19 status, including whether the respondent had had COVID-19, whether they had come into likely contact with COVID-19, current isolation status and motivations for isolation, length of isolation, length of time not leaving the home, length of time not contacting others, trust in government, trust in the health service, adherence to health advice, and experience of adverse events due to COVID-19 (including severe illness within the family, bereavement, redundancy, or financial difficulties).
• Mental health, including wellbeing, depression, anxiety, which factors were causing stress, sleep quality, loneliness, social isolation, and changes in health behaviours such as smoking, drinking and exercise.
• How people were spending their time whilst in isolation, including questions on working, functional household activities, care, and schooling of any children in the household, hobbies, and relaxation.

Certain waves of the study also included one-off modules on topics including volunteering behaviours, locus of control, frustrations and expectations, coping styles, fear of COVID-19, resilience, arts and creative engagement, life events, weight, gambling behaviours, mental health diagnosis, use of financial support, faith and religion, relationships, neighbourhood satisfaction, healthcare usage, discrimination experiences, life changes, optimism, long COVID and COVID-19 vaccination.

BackgroundLong-term health conditions can affect labour market outcomes. COVID-19 may have increased labour market inequalities, e.g. due to restricted opportunities for clinically vulnerable people. Evaluating COVID-19’s impact could help target support.AimTo quantify the effect of several long-term conditions on UK labour market outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic and compare them to pre-pandemic outcomes.MethodsThe Understanding Society COVID-19 survey collected responses from around 20,000 UK residents in nine waves from April 2020-September 2021. Participants employed in January/February 2020 with a variety of long-term conditions were matched with people without the condition but with similar baseline characteristics. Models estimated probability of employment, hours worked and earnings. We compared these results with results from a two-year pre-pandemic period. We also modelled probability of furlough and home-working frequency during COVID-19.ResultsMost conditions (asthma, arthritis, emotional/nervous/psychiatric problems, vascular/pulmonary/liver conditions, epilepsy) were associated with reduced employment probability and/or hours worked during COVID-19, but not pre-pandemic. Furlough was more likely for people with pulmonary conditions. People with arthritis and cancer were slower to return to in-person working. Few effects were seen for earnings.ConclusionCOVID-19 had a disproportionate impact on people with long-term conditions’ labour market outcomes.

Snapshot img

Covid-19 Vaccination Market 2024-2028

The covid-19 vaccination market size is forecast to increase by USD -32.76 billion, at a CAGR of -37.4% between 2023 and 2028. The market is experiencing significant growth due to the expansion of vaccination programs worldwide. Governments and international organizations are investing heavily in vaccination initiatives to contain the spread of the virus. The rising research and development (R&D) investment in the development of Covid-19 vaccines is another major growth factor. However, the high cost of production of Covid-19 vaccines poses a significant challenge to market growth. Manufacturers are exploring various strategies to reduce production costs while maintaining vaccine efficacy and safety. The market is expected to witness strong growth in the coming years as more effective and affordable vaccines become available. poiuyfrtyh

What will the Covid-19 Vaccination Market Size be During the Forecast Period?

Download Report Sample to Unlock the Covid-19 Vaccination Market Size for the Forecast Period and Other Important Statistics

Market Dynamics

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about an unprecedented global health crisis, leading to the development of numerous vaccines to mitigate its impact. This content focuses on various aspects of COVID-19 vaccines, including production, distribution, administration, efficacy, safety, and regulations. COVID-19 vaccine production has been a top priority for researchers and pharmaceutical companies worldwide. Several manufacturers have developed vaccines using various technologies such as mRNA, viral vector, and protein subunit, undergoing rigorous testing and clinical trials to ensure safety and efficacy. Once vaccines receive approval from regulatory bodies, they are distributed to healthcare facilities and vaccination centers, requiring careful planning and coordination. Governments and international organizations are working to ensure equitable distribution, prioritizing vulnerable populations and herd immunity. Vaccine administration involves healthcare professionals delivering vaccines through injections, with proper training and safety protocols to minimize adverse reactions. Efficacy refers to the vaccine's ability to prevent infection or reduce the severity of symptoms, with most vaccines showing high efficacy rates, ranging from 60% to 95%. Vaccine safety is monitored closely, and while common side effects include pain and swelling at the injection site, fever, and fatigue, serious side effects are rare.

Vaccine procurement involves purchasing vaccines from manufacturers, with governments securing supplies through contracts and partnerships. Vaccine allocation ensures that vaccines are distributed to specific populations, with priority given to vulnerable groups like healthcare workers and the elderly. Vaccine prioritization determines which populations should receive vaccines first, based on risk factors. Vaccine passports are digital or physical documents that prove vaccination status, and may be required for travel or work, with regulations varying by jurisdiction. Vaccine mandates, which require vaccination for employment or participation in certain activities, remain a controversial issue. Vaccine regulations ensure vaccines are safe and effective, and policies governing vaccine use in schools, workplaces, and travel may change as supplies and public health conditions evolve.

Covid-19 Vaccination Market Driver

The expansion of vaccination programs is the key driver of the market. The market is experiencing significant growth due to the increasing demand for vaccines as governments and healthcare organizations prioritize widespread vaccination to control the virus and achieve herd immunity. This heightened demand leads to increased production and sales for vaccine manufacturers, resulting in long-term procurement contracts being signed to ensure a consistent vaccine supply. These contracts provide stability and revenue for manufacturers, with more contracts expected to be established as vaccination programs expand.

Vaccine distribution, administration, and logistics are crucial elements in the vaccine market, requiring efficient vaccine storage, transportation, and scheduling. Vaccine safety, efficacy, and monitoring are also vital considerations, along with addressing vaccine hesitancy and acceptance through education and outreach efforts. Vaccine regulations, policies, and campaigns are essential in ensuring vaccine coverage, immunity, and compliance with side effects and potential mandates or certificates.

Covid-19 Vaccination Market Trends

Rising research and development investment is the upcoming trend in the market. The Covid-19 pandemic has necessitated the rapid development, production, and distribution of vaccines to prevent and treat the disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Governments and the private sector have collaborated to invest in va

Executive summary: Studying the spread and epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 virus specially in household settings are needed to prepare our self-better in preventing and controlling this epidemic. In this study we proposed a conceptual framework of four level of determinates and tried to understand the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 among household contacts along with clinical, epidemiological and virologic characteristics of the infection. Aims & Objectives: the proportion of asymptomatic cases and symptomatic cases; the incubation period of COVID-19 and the duration of infectiousness and of detectable shedding; the serial interval of COVID-19 infection; clinical risk factors for COVID-19, and the clinical course and severity of disease; high-risk population subgroups; the secondary infection rate and secondary clinical attack rate of COVID-19 infection among household contacts; and the associations of various factors across four dimensions interaction associated with risk of transmission Methodology: This was a case-ascertained study where all susceptible contacts of a laboratory confirmed COVID-19 case were studied prospective for four weeks after their enrolment. It was done in New Delhi, during the end of first wave as well as whole second wave from December 2020 to July 2021. The study team collected the key information by questionnaire along with blood and oro-nasal swab during the household visits. Follow-up was done on day 7, 14 and 28 for observing the disease characteristic and symptomatology along with confirmation by serum and oro-nasal swab testing. Daily characteristics of the infection were noted by the participants on symptoms diary. Results: We enrolled 99 households, each having one laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 index case along with their 318 susceptible contacts. By the end of the follow-up, secondary infection rate was seen at 55.5%, while seroconversion in 46.6%. Hospitalization and case fatality rate was 3.83% and 1.7% respectively. Among epidemiological characteristics we observed serial interval of 8.0 �� 6.7 days, generation time 3.8 �� 6.4, while secondary attack rate was 54.9%. The predictors of secondary infection among individual contact level were being female (OR:2.13, 95% CI:1.27 - 3.57), age of the household contact (1.01;1.00 - 1.03), symptoms at baseline (3.39; 1.61- 7.12) and during follow-up (3.18; 1.64 - 6.19), while only symptoms during follow-up (3.81: 1.43 - 10.14) and being RT-PCR positive (8.32; 3.22 -21.54) was significantly and independently associated with seroconversion among household contacts. Among index case-level age of the primary case (1.03; 1.01 -1.04) and any symptoms during follow-up (6.29; 1.83-21.63) significantly and independently associated with secondary infection while any symptoms during follow-up was associated with seroconversion among household contacts. Among household-level characteristics having more rooms (4.44; 2.16 - 9.13) independently associated with secondary infection, while more rooms (3.98; 1.23 -12.90) along with overcrowding (0.37; 0.16 - 0.82) associated with seroconversion. Among contact pattern only taking care of the index case (2.02;1.21- 3.38) was significantly and independently associated with secondary infection, while none was associated with seroconversion. Conclusion: A high secondary cases and secondary attack rate was seen in our study. This highlights the need to adopts strict measure and advocate COVID appropriate behaviours in order to break the transmission chain at household level. The targeted approach at household contacts with higher risk would be efficient in limiting the development of infection among susceptible contacts.

Indicators from the Opinions and Lifestyle Survey covering the period 28 April to 3 May 2021 to understand current attitudes of adults in Great Britain to attending events compared to before the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Indicators are available broken down by age, sex, region, ethnicity, disability status, clinical extremely vulnerable status and vaccination status.

Cohort summary statistics, Wales.

The psychological cost on emotional well-being due to the collateral damage brought about by COVID-19 in accessing oncological services for breast cancer diagnosis and treatment has been documented by recent studies in the United Kingdom. The current study set out to examine the effect of delays to scheduled oncology services on emotional and cognitive vulnerability in women with a breast cancer diagnosis in Iran, one of the very first countries to be heavily impacted by COVID-19. One hundred thirty-nine women with a diagnosis of primary breast cancer answered a series of online questionnaires to assess the current state of rumination, worry, and cognitive vulnerability as well as the emotional impact of COVID-19 on their mental health. Results indicated that delays in accessing oncology services significantly increased COVID related emotional vulnerability. Regression analyses revealed that after controlling for the effects of sociodemographic and clinical variables, women’s COVID related emotional vulnerability explained higher levels of ruminative response and chronic worry as well as poorer cognitive function. This study is the first in Iran to demonstrate that the effects of COVID-19 on emotional health amongst women affected by breast cancer can exaggerate anxiety and depressive related symptoms increasing risks for clinical levels of these disorders. Our findings call for an urgent need to address these risks using targeted interventions exercising resilience.