Showing papers on "Confidence interval published in 2021"

Population estimate of people with clinical Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment in the United States (2020-2060).

Abstract: Introduction The estimate of people with clinical Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment provides an understanding of the disease burden Methods We estimated people with cognitive impairment using a quasibinomial regression model in 10,342 participants with cognitive test scores Results The 2020 US Census-adjusted prevalence of clinical AD was 113% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 107-119): 100% among non-Hispanic Whites, 140% among Hispanics, and 186% among non-Hispanic Blacks We estimate that in 2020, 607 (95% CI = 575-638) million people were living with clinical AD, which increases to 1385 (95% CI = 1298-1474) million in 2060, 423% higher among Hispanics, 192% higher among Blacks, and 63% higher among Whites However, there are predicted to be more significant increases in later years among those over 85 and women compared to men Discussion The number of people with clinical AD will increase as the "baby boom" generation reaches older ages, exerting a strong upward influence on disease burden

Statistics of Robust Optimization: A Generalized Empirical Likelihood Approach

Abstract: We study statistical inference and distributionally robust solution methods for stochastic optimization problems, focusing on confidence intervals for optimal values and solutions that achieve exac...

Acceptance of a COVID-19 Vaccine and its Related Determinants among the General Adult Population in Kuwait.

Abstract: Objective: The objective of this study was to determine the acceptance of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine among the general adult population in Kuwait and assess its determinants. Subjects and Methods: A web-based cross-sectional study was conducted by enrolling adults living in Kuwait (n = 2,368; aged ≥21 years). Acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine was inferred if participants indicated that they “definitely or probably will accept vaccination against COVID-19 once a vaccine is available.” Associations were explored by applying a modified Poisson regression to estimate and infer adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: In total, 53.1% (1,257/2,368) of the participants were willing to accept a COVID-19 vaccine once available. Male subjects were more willing to accept a COVID-19 vaccine than females (58.3 vs. 50.9%, p < 0.001). Subjects who viewed vaccines in general to have health-related risks were less willing to accept vaccination (aPR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.35–0.44). Moreover, participants who previously received an influenza vaccine were more likely to accept a COVID-19 vaccine (aPR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.31–1.58). Willingness to get vaccinated against COVID-19 increased as the self-perceived chances of contracting the infection increased (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Overall, 53.1% of the study participants demonstrated willingness to get vaccinated against COVID-19. We found several factors influencing the level of acceptance. Since vaccination appears to be an essential preventive measure that can halt the COVID-19 pandemic, factors relating to low vaccine acceptance need to be urgently addressed by public health strategies.

Adherence to the test, trace, and isolate system in the UK: results from 37 nationally representative surveys.

Abstract: Objective To investigate rates of adherence to the UK’s test, trace, and isolate system over the initial 11 months of the covid-19 pandemic. Design Series of cross sectional online surveys. Setting 37 nationally representative surveys in the UK, 2 March 2020 to 27 January 2021. Participants 74 697 responses from 53 880 people living in the UK, aged 16 years or older (37 survey waves, about 2000 participants in each wave). Main outcome measures Identification of the main symptoms of covid-19 (cough, high temperature or fever, and loss of sense of smell or taste), self-reported adherence to self-isolation if symptoms were present and intention to self-isolate if symptoms were to develop, requesting a test for covid-19 if symptoms were present and intention to request a test if symptoms were to develop, and intention to share details of close contacts. Results Only 51.5% of participants (95% confidence interval 51.0% to 51.9%, n=26 030/50 570) identified the main symptoms of covid-19; the corresponding values in the most recent wave of data collection (25-27 January 2021) were 50.8% (48.6% to 53.0%, n=1019/2007). Across all waves, duration adjusted adherence to full self-isolation was 42.5% (95% confidence interval 39.7% to 45.2%, n=515/1213); in the most recent wave of data collection (25-27 January 2021), it was 51.8% (40.8% to 62.8%, n=43/83). Across all waves, requesting a test for covid-19 was 18.0% (95% confidence interval 16.6% to 19.3%, n=552/3068), increasing to 22.2% (14.6% to 29.9%, n=26/117) from 25 to 27 January. Across all waves, intention to share details of close contacts was 79.1% (95% confidence interval 78.8% to 79.5%, n=36 145/45 680), increasing to 81.9% (80.1% to 83.6%, n=1547/1890) from 25 to 27 January. Non-adherence was associated with being male, younger age, having a dependent child in the household, lower socioeconomic grade, greater financial hardship during the pandemic, and working in a key sector. Conclusions Levels of adherence to test, trace, and isolate are low, although some improvement has occurred over time. Practical support and financial reimbursement are likely to improve adherence. Targeting messaging and policies to men, younger age groups, and key workers might also be necessary.

Prevention of Cardiac Surgery-Associated Acute Kidney Injury by Implementing the KDIGO Guidelines in High-Risk Patients Identified by Biomarkers: The PrevAKI-Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Prospective, single-center trials have shown that the implementation of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) recommendations in high-risk patients significantly reduced the development of acute kidney injury (AKI) after surgery. We sought to evaluate the feasibility of implementing a bundle of supportive measures based on the KDIGO guideline in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery in a multicenter setting in preparation for a large definitive trial. METHODS: In this multicenter, multinational, randomized controlled trial, we examined the adherence to the KDIGO bundle consisting of optimization of volume status and hemodynamics, functional hemodynamic monitoring, avoidance of nephrotoxic drugs, and prevention of hyperglycemia in high-risk patients identified by the urinary biomarkers tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2 [TIMP-2] and insulin growth factor-binding protein 7 [IGFBP7] after cardiac surgery. The primary end point was the adherence to the bundle protocol and was evaluated by the percentage of compliant patients with a 95% confidence interval (CI) according to Clopper-Pearson. Secondary end points included the development and severity of AKI. RESULTS: In total, 278 patients were included in the final analysis. In the intervention group, 65.4% of patients received the complete bundle as compared to 4.2% in the control group (absolute risk reduction [ARR] 61.2 [95% CI, 52.6-69.9]; P < .001). AKI rates were statistically not different in both groups (46.3% intervention versus 41.5% control group; ARR -4.8% [95% CI, -16.4 to 6.9]; P = .423). However, the occurrence of moderate and severe AKI was significantly lower in the intervention group as compared to the control group (14.0% vs 23.9%; ARR 10.0% [95% CI, 0.9-19.1]; P = .034). There were no significant effects on other specified secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a KDIGO-derived treatment bundle is feasible in a multinational setting. Furthermore, moderate to severe AKI was significantly reduced in the intervention group.

Hypertension is a clinically important risk factor for critical illness and mortality in COVID-19: A meta-analysis.

Abstract: AIMS: As reported, hypertension may play an important role in adverse outcomes of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), but it still had many confounding factors. The aim of this study was to explore whether hypertension is an independent risk factor for critical COVID-19 and mortality. DATA SYNTHESIS: The Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched until November 2020. Combined odds ratios (ORs) with their 95% confidence interval (CIs) were calculated by using random-effect models, and the effect of covariates was analyzed using the subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis. A total of 24 observational studies with 99,918 COVID-19 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The proportions of hypertension in critical COVID-19 were 37% (95% CI: 0.27 -0.47) when compared with 18% (95% CI: 0.14 -0.23) of noncritical COVID-19 patients, in those who died were 46% (95%CI: 0.37 -0.55) when compared with 22% (95% CI: 0.16 -0.28) of survivors. Pooled results based on the adjusted OR showed that patients with hypertension had a 1.82-fold higher risk for critical COVID-19 (aOR: 1.82; 95% CI: 1.19 - 2.77; P = 0.005) and a 2.17-fold higher risk for COVID-19 mortality (aOR: 2.17; 95% CI: 1.67 - 2.82; P 60 years was associated with a significantly increased risk of COVID-19 mortality (OR: 3.12; 95% CI: 1.93 - 5.05; P < 0.001). Meta-regression analysis results also showed that age (Coef. = 2.3×10-2, P = 0.048) had a significant influence on the association between hypertension and COVID-19 mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from this meta-analysis suggested that hypertension was independently associated with a significantly increased risk of critical COVID-19 and inhospital mortality of COVID-19.

Transmission dynamics and epidemiological characteristics of Delta variant infections in China

Abstract: Background The Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 has become predominant globally. We evaluated the transmission dynamics and epidemiological characteristics of the Delta variant in an outbreak in southern China. Methods Data on confirmed cases and their close contacts were retrospectively collected from the outbreak that occurred in Guangdong, China in May-June 2021. Key epidemiological parameters, temporal trend of viral loads and secondary attack rates were estimated and compared between the Delta variant and the wild-type SARS-CoV-2 virus. We also evaluated the association of vaccination with viral load and transmission. Results We identified 167 patients infected with the Delta variant in the Guangdong outbreak. The mean estimates of the latent period and the incubation period were 4.0 days and 5.8 days, respectively. A relatively higher viral load was observed in Delta cases than in wild-type infections. The secondary attack rate among close contacts of Delta cases was 1.4%, and 73.9% (95% confidence interval: 67.2%, 81.3%) of the transmissions occurred before onset. Index cases without vaccination (OR: 2.84, 95% confidence interval: 1.19, 8.45) or with one dose of vaccination (OR: 6.02, 95% confidence interval: 2.45, 18.16) were more likely to transmit infection to their contacts than those who had received 2 doses of vaccination. Discussion Patients infected with the Delta variant had more rapid symptom onset. The shorter and time-varying serial interval should be accounted in estimation of reproductive numbers. The higher viral load and higher risk of pre-symptomatic transmission indicated the challenges in control of infections with the Delta variant.

Placental histopathology after SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE This study aimed to report the spectrum of placental pathology findings in pregnancies complicated by SARS-CoV-2 infection. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and the Web of Science databases were searched up to August 11, 2021. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Histopathologic anomalies included maternal vascular malperfusion, fetal vascular malperfusion, acute inflammatory pathology, chronic inflammatory pathology, increased perivillous fibrin, and intervillous thrombosis. Moreover, subanalyses of symptomatic women only and high-risk pregnancies were performed. METHODS: Histopathologic analysis of the placenta included gross examination, histopathology on hematoxylin and eosin, immunohistochemistry, fluorescence in situ hybridization, quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction on placental tissue, and transmission electron microscope. Random-effect meta-analyses were used to analyze the data. RESULTS A total of 56 studies (1008 pregnancies) were included. Maternal vascular malperfusion was reported in 30.7% of placentas (95% confidence interval, 20.3–42.1), whereas fetal vascular malperfusion was observed in 27.08 % of cases (95% confidence interval, 19.2–35.6). Acute and chronic inflammatory pathologies were reported in 22.68% (95% confidence interval, 16.9–29.0) and 25.65% (95% confidence interval, 18.4–33.6) of cases, respectively. Increased perivillous fibrin was observed in 32.7% (95% confidence interval, 24.1–42.0) of placentas undergoing histopathologic analysis, whereas intervillous thrombosis was observed in 14.6% of cases (95% confidence interval, 9.7–20.2). Other placental findings, including a basal plate with attached myometrial fibers, microscopic accretism, villous edema, increased circulating nucleated red blood cells, or membranes with hemorrhage, were reported in 37.5% of cases (95% confidence interval, 28.0–47.5), whereas only 17.5% of cases (95% confidence interval, 10.9–25.2) did not present any abnormal histologic findings. The subanalyses according to maternal symptoms owing to SARS-CoV-2 infection or the presence of a high-risk pregnancy showed a similar distribution of the different histopathologic anomalies to that reported in the main analysis. Moreover, the risk of placental histopathologic anomalies was higher when considering only case-control studies comparing women with SARS-CoV-2 infection with healthy controls. CONCLUSION In pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, a significant proportion of placentas showed histopathologic findings, suggesting placental hypoperfusion and inflammation. Future multicenter prospective blinded studies are needed to correlate these placental lesions with pregnancy outcomes.

Minimum sample size for external validation of a clinical prediction model with a continuous outcome

Abstract: In prediction model research, external validation is needed to examine an existing model's performance using data independent to that for model development. Current external validation studies often suffer from small sample sizes and consequently imprecise predictive performance estimates. To address this, we propose how to determine the minimum sample size needed for a new external validation study of a prediction model for a binary outcome. Our calculations aim to precisely estimate calibration (Observed/Expected and calibration slope), discrimination (C-statistic), and clinical utility (net benefit). For each measure, we propose closed-form and iterative solutions for calculating the minimum sample size required. These require specifying: (i) target SEs (confidence interval widths) for each estimate of interest, (ii) the anticipated outcome event proportion in the validation population, (iii) the prediction model's anticipated (mis)calibration and variance of linear predictor values in the validation population, and (iv) potential risk thresholds for clinical decision-making. The calculations can also be used to inform whether the sample size of an existing (already collected) dataset is adequate for external validation. We illustrate our proposal for external validation of a prediction model for mechanical heart valve failure with an expected outcome event proportion of 0.018. Calculations suggest at least 9835 participants (177 events) are required to precisely estimate the calibration and discrimination measures, with this number driven by the calibration slope criterion, which we anticipate will often be the case. Also, 6443 participants (116 events) are required to precisely estimate net benefit at a risk threshold of 8%. Software code is provided.

National health and nutrition examination survey 2017–march 2020 prepandemic data files-development of files and prevalence estimates for selected health outcomes

Abstract: Background and objectives-In March 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic halted National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) field operations. As data collected in the partial 2019–2020 cycle (herein referred to as 2019–March 2020) are not nationally representative, they were combined with previously released 2017–2018 data to produce nationally representative estimates. This report explains the creation of the 2017–March 2020 prepandemic data files, provides recommendations for and limitations of the files’ use, and presents prevalence estimates for selected health outcomes based on the files. Methods-The 2019–2020 primary sampling units (PSUs) were reassigned to the 2015–2018 sample design strata and combined with the 2017–2018 data to create a data set that could be used to calculate nationally representative estimates. A PSUlevel adjustment factor was created to equalize the contribution of each stratum to the total survey sample and applied to participant base weights. Interview and examination weights were calculated from the adjusted base weights. The performance of final interview weights was assessed by comparing the demographic characteristics of the weighted NHANES 2017–March 2020 prepandemic sample with nationally representative estimates from the 2018 5-year American Community Survey. Prevalence estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for selected health outcomes. Results-Among children and adolescents aged 2–19 years, the prevalence of obesity was 19.7% and the prevalence of untreated or restored dental caries in one or more primary or permanent teeth was 46.0%. Among adults aged 20 and over, the age-adjusted prevalence of obesity was 41.9%, severe obesity was 9.2%, and diabetes was 14.8%. Among adults aged 18 and over, the age-adjusted prevalence of hypertension was 45.1%. Among adults aged 65 and over, the age-adjusted prevalence of complete tooth loss was 13.8%. Conclusion-A PSU-level adjustment factor and additional weighting adjustments made nationally representative estimates from the 2017–March 2020 prepandemic data files possible;this was the last NHANES data collected before widespread transmission of COVID-19. © 2021, National Center for Health Statistics. All rights reserved.

Effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA Vaccination Against COVID-19 Hospitalization Among Persons Aged 12-18 Years - United States, June-September 2021.

Abstract: Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is authorized for use in children and adolescents aged 12-15 years and is licensed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for persons aged ≥16 (1). A randomized placebo-controlled trial demonstrated an efficacy of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 75.3%-100%) in preventing outpatient COVID-19 in persons aged 12-15 years (2); however, data among adolescents on vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 in real-world settings are limited, especially among hospitalized patients. In early September 2021, U.S. pediatric COVID-19 hospitalizations reached the highest level during the pandemic (3,4). In a test-negative, case-control study at 19 pediatric hospitals in 16 states during June 1-September 30, 2021, the effectiveness of 2 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine against COVID-19 hospitalization was assessed among children and adolescents aged 12-18 years. Among 464 hospitalized persons aged 12-18 years (179 case-patients and 285 controls), the median age was 15 years, 72% had at least one underlying condition, including obesity, and 68% attended in-person school. Effectiveness of 2 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine against COVID-19 hospitalization was 93% (95% CI = 83%-97%), during the period when B.1.617.2 (Delta) was the predominant variant. This evaluation demonstrated that 2 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine are highly effective at preventing COVID-19 hospitalization among persons aged 12-18 years and reinforces the importance of vaccination to protect U.S. youths against severe COVID-19.

Association of Antibiotic Exposure With Survival and Toxicity in Patients With Melanoma Receiving Immunotherapy.

Abstract: BACKGROUND Gut microbial diversity is associated with improved response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Based on the known detrimental impact that antibiotics have on microbiome diversity, we hypothesized that antibiotic receipt prior to ICI would be associated with decreased survival. METHODS Patients with stage III and IV melanoma treated with ICI between 2008 and 2019 were selected from an institutional database. A window of antibiotic receipt within 3 months prior to the first infusion of ICI was prespecified. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and secondary outcomes were melanoma-specific mortality and immune-mediated colitis requiring intravenous steroids. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS There were 568 patients in our database of which 114 received antibiotics prior to ICI. Of the patients, 35.9% had stage III disease. On multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis of patients with stage IV disease, the antibiotic-exposed group had statistically significantly worse OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.27 to 2.57; P <.001). The same effect was observed among antibiotic-exposed patients with stage III disease (HR = 2.78, 95% CI = 1.31 to 5.87; P =.007). When limited to only patients who received adjuvant ICI (n = 89), antibiotic-exposed patients also had statistically significantly worse OS (HR = 4.84, 95% CI = 1.09 to 21.50; P =.04). The antibiotic group had a greater incidence of colitis (HR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.02 to 4.52; P =.046). CONCLUSION Patients with stage III and IV melanoma exposed to antibiotics prior to ICI had statistically significantly worse OS than unexposed patients. Antibiotic exposure was associated with greater incidence of moderate to severe immune-mediated colitis. Given the large number of antibiotics prescribed annually, physicians should be judicious with their use in cancer populations likely to receive ICI.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of 821 Older Patients with SARS-Cov-2 Infection Admitted to Acute Care Geriatric Wards.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: There is limited information describing the characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized older patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We conducted a multicentric retrospective cohort study in 13 acute COVID-19 geriatric wards, from March 13 to April 15, 2020, in Paris area. All consecutive patients aged ≥ 70 years, with confirmed COVID-19, were enrolled. RESULTS: Of the 821 patients included in the study, the mean (SD) age was 86 (7) years; 58% were female; 85% had ≥ 2 comorbidities; 29% lived in an institution; and the median (interquartile range) Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADL) score was 4 [2-6]. The most common symptoms at COVID-19 onset were asthenia (63%), fever (55%), dyspnea (45%), dry cough (45%) and delirium (25%). The in-hospital mortality was 31% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27 to 33). On multivariate analysis, at COVID-19 onset, the probability of in-hospital mortality was increased with male gender (odds ratio [OR], 1.85; 95% CI, 1.30 to 2.63), ADL score < 4 (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.70), asthenia (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.08 to 2.32), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score ≥ 2 (OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.64 to 4.22) and specific COVID-19 anomalies on chest computerized tomography (OR, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.07 to 6.46). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides new information about older patients with COVID-19 who are hospitalized. A quick bedside evaluation at admission of sex, functional status, systolic arterial pressure, consciousness, respiratory rate and asthenia can identify older patients at risk of unfavorable outcomes.

Performance of the Attenuation Imaging Technology in the Detection of Liver Steatosis

Abstract: Objectives The main aim was to assess the performance and cutoff value for the detection of liver steatosis (grade S > 0) with the Attenuation Imaging-Penetration (ATI-Pen) algorithm available on the Aplio i-series ultrasound systems (Canon Medical Systems, Otawara, Japan). The magnetic resonance imaging-derived proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) was used as the reference standard. Secondary aims were to compare the results to those obtained with the previous ATI algorithm (Attenuation Imaging-General [ATI-Gen]) and with the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) and to generate a regression equation between ATI-Pen and ATI-Gen values. Methods Consecutive adult patients potentially at risk of liver steatosis were prospectively enrolled. Each patient underwent ultrasound quantification of liver steatosis with ATI-Pen and ATI-Gen and a CAP assessment with the FibroScan system (Echosens, Paris, France). The MRI-PDFF evaluation was performed within a week. The correlations between ATI-Pen, ATI-Gen, the CAP, and the MRI-PDFF were analyzed with the Pearson rank correlation coefficient. The diagnostic performance of ATI-Pen, ATI-Gen, and the CAP was assessed with receiver operating characteristic curves and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analysis. Results Seventy-two individuals (31 male and 41 female) were enrolled. Correlation coefficients of ATI-Pen, ATI-Gen, and the CAP with the MRI-PDFF were 0.78, 0.83, and 0.58, respectively. The AUROCs of ATI-Pen, ATI-Gen, and the CAP for detecting steatosis (S > 0) were 0.90 (95% confidence interval, 0.81-0.96), 0.92 (0.82-0.98), and 0.85 (0.74-0.92), and the cutoffs were greater than 0.69 dB/cm/MHz, greater than 0.62 dB/cm/MHz, and greater than 273 dB/m. The regression equation between ATI-Pen and ATI-Gen was ATI-Pen = 0.88 ATI-Gen + 0.13. Conclusions Attenuation Imaging is a reliable tool for detecting liver steatosis, showing an excellent correlation with the MRI-PDFF and high performance with AUROCs of 0.90 or higher.

US population norms for the EQ-5D-5L and comparison of norms from face-to-face and online samples

Abstract: Normative scores (norms) allow for comparisons between population(s) of interest and the general population, which is useful for burden of disease studies and cost-effectiveness analysis. The primary aim of this study was to estimate US visual analogue scale (EQ VAS) and utility-based norms for the EQ-5D-5L using the face-to-face sample. The secondary aim was to compare norms estimated in the face-to-face and online populations. This study estimated population norms from two general population surveys: (a) face-to-face and (b) online. In these surveys, respondents provided their health state using the EQ-5D-5L health classifier and the EQ VAS. Descriptive statistics, including mean, standard deviation (SD), 95% confidence interval, and median for the 5L utility and EQ VAS were estimated for each sample and across relevant respondent characteristics to serve as the basis for US EQ-5D-5L norms Face-to-face sample respondents (n = 1134) were representative of the US adult general population. In this sample, mean (SD) utility decreased with increasing age until age 45 or greater (age 45–54: 0.816 (0.249) age 55–64: 0.815 (0.243) age 65–74: 0.824 (0.217) age 75 + : 0.811 (0.218)). With increasing age, more problems were reported on all dimensions except anxiety/depression; a smaller proportion of respondents age 65 and older reported problems with anxiety/depression (23.8%) as compared to the youngest respondents (42.1%). Online (n = 2018) mean utility and EQ VAS values were consistently lower than the face-to-face sample. The availability of US EQ-5D-5L norms facilitates interpretation and understanding of general population and patient health.

COVID-19 Vaccination and Non-COVID-19 Mortality Risk - Seven Integrated Health Care Organizations, United States, December 14, 2020-July 31, 2021.

Abstract: By September 21, 2021, an estimated 182 million persons in the United States were fully vaccinated against COVID-19.* Clinical trials indicate that Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson; Ad.26.COV2.S) vaccines are effective and generally well tolerated (1-3). However, daily vaccination rates have declined approximately 78% since April 13, 2021†; vaccine safety concerns have contributed to vaccine hesitancy (4). A cohort study of 19,625 nursing home residents found that those who received an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) had lower all-cause mortality than did unvaccinated residents (5), but no studies comparing mortality rates within the general population of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons have been conducted. To assess mortality not associated with COVID-19 (non-COVID-19 mortality) after COVID-19 vaccination in a general population setting, a cohort study was conducted during December 2020-July 2021 among approximately 11 million persons enrolled in seven Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) sites.§ After standardizing mortality rates by age and sex, this study found that COVID-19 vaccine recipients had lower non-COVID-19 mortality than did unvaccinated persons. After adjusting for demographic characteristics and VSD site, this study found that adjusted relative risk (aRR) of non-COVID-19 mortality for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 0.41 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.38-0.44) after dose 1 and 0.34 (95% CI = 0.33-0.36) after dose 2. The aRRs of non-COVID-19 mortality for the Moderna vaccine were 0.34 (95% CI = 0.32-0.37) after dose 1 and 0.31 (95% CI = 0.30-0.33) after dose 2. The aRR after receipt of the Janssen vaccine was 0.54 (95% CI = 0.49-0.59). There is no increased risk for mortality among COVID-19 vaccine recipients. This finding reinforces the safety profile of currently approved COVID-19 vaccines in the United States.

Vaccine effectiveness against infection with the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant, Norway, April to August 2021.

Abstract: Some variants of SARS-CoV-2 are associated with increased transmissibility, increased disease severity or decreased vaccine effectiveness (VE). In this population-based cohort study (n = 4,204,859), the Delta variant was identified in 5,430 (0.13%) individuals, of whom 84 were admitted to hospital. VE against laboratory confirmed infection with the Delta variant was 22.4% among partly vaccinated (95% confidence interval (CI): 17.0−27.4) and 64.6% (95% CI: 60.6−68.2) among fully vaccinated individuals, compared with 54.5% (95% CI: 50.4−58.3) and 84.4% (95%CI: 81.8−86.5) against the Alpha variant.