Overcoming COVID-19 vaccine preferential bias in Europe: Is the end of the pandemic still foreseeable?
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The availability of safe and effective vaccine alone does not save lives; it is the inoculation plus other public health measures that do. Recent reports suggest the growing trend in vaccine preferential bias in parts of the world but not much in Europe. The present paper aims to investigate the occurrence of COVID-19 vaccine preferential bias in Europe for effective vaccination planning and pandemic control.
Method
Data on vaccine delivered and vaccination campaigns of the EU member states was collected from Eu center for disease control (EUCDC) on COVID-19 vaccination radar. The data was processed for analysis on MS excel and both descriptive and statistical analysis was done with IBM’s SPSS version 21. Analysis was performed at 95% confidence interval and statistically significant difference was considered at p < 0.05.
Results
We observed statistically significantly lower vaccine uptake compared to the vaccine delivered doses in the present study (average at 62.678 +/-3.928%) (p< 0.05, CI = 95%). Great variances in uptake for Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines (50.927 +/-4.626 %) compared to Pfizer-Biontech vaccine (86.285 +/- 2.1052 %) was observed compared to previous prospective study on the wiliness to receive COVID-19 vaccine in the region (75%).
Conclusion
Public health practitioners and policy makers need to factor the existence of COVID-19 preferential bias based on vaccine type or manufacturer. This will enable them introduce policies including public educational campaigns to overcome biasness on the wiliness to inoculate thereby enhancing vaccine uptake for smooth and effective control of the pandemic.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.23.21259422: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources The extracted data was organized for analysis using Microsoft’s Excel 2010. Microsoft’s Excelsuggested: NoneDescriptive and statistical analysis were performed using IBM’s SPSS version 21 and analysis at 95% confidence interval and statistically significant difference was considered at p < 0.05. SPSSsuggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from Limi…SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.23.21259422: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources The extracted data was organized for analysis using Microsoft’s Excel 2010. Microsoft’s Excelsuggested: NoneDescriptive and statistical analysis were performed using IBM’s SPSS version 21 and analysis at 95% confidence interval and statistically significant difference was considered at p < 0.05. SPSSsuggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
