Submit to Vaccines Review for Vaccines Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser

Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines

Special Issue Editors
Special Issue Information
Keywords
Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue
Related Special Issue
Published Papers

A special issue of Vaccines (ISSN 2076-393X). This special issue belongs to the section "Epidemiology".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 May 2022) | Viewed by 45132

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editor

Prof. Dr. Giuseppe La Torre

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
Interests: occupational health; epidemiology; public health; work-related stress
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

As Section Editor-in-Chief of Epidemiology, I am glad to announce the Special Issue "Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines". This Special Issue is aimed to enhance the impact of the interactions and effects of vaccines (and vaccination programs) on the occurrence of vaccine-preventable diseases.

In this Special Issue, we will collect articles from top researchers describing new approaches or new cutting-edge developments in the fields of infectivity, vaccine efficacy and effectiveness, vaccine failure, herd immunity, herd effect, epidemiological transfer, and disease modeling of various epidemics. Moreover, this Special Issue also considers the viewpoints of major stakeholders, including decision makers, immunization program managers, public health experts, pediatricians, family doctors, and other experts/individuals involved in the provision of immunization services and those who conduct research on awareness and behaviors surrounding vaccine epidemiology, as well as in other relevant scientific fields. We welcome the submission of manuscripts from Editorial Board Members and from outstanding scholars invited by the Editorial Board and the Editorial Office.

You are welcome to send short proposals for submissions of Feature Papers to our Editorial Office ([email protected]) for evaluation.

Prof. Dr. Giuseppe La Torre
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Vaccines is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2700 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

epidemiology
public health
vaccine
vaccine hesitancy
vaccination

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Related Special Issue

Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines 2.0 in Vaccines (8 articles)

Published Papers (9 papers)

Download All Papers

Order results

Result details

Show export options Show export options

Select all

Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

15 pages, 283 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Factors Associated with Attitudes towards Preventing Head and Neck Cancer through HPV Vaccination in Poland: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey in 2021

by Wojciech Pinkas, Mateusz Jankowski and Waldemar Wierzba

Vaccines 2022, 10(4), 632; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10040632 - 18 Apr 2022

Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2647

Abstract

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is a risk factor for head and neck cancers (HNC). HPV-related head and neck cancers are preventable through vaccination. This study aimed to assess the attitudes towards HPV vaccination among adults in Poland, with particular emphasis on preventing HPV-related HNC, as well as identifying factors associated with a willingness to vaccinate children against HPV. This cross-sectional survey was carried out in November 2021 on a nationwide, representative sample of 1082 adults in Poland. The computer-assisted web interview (CAWI) technique was used. Only 42.5% of respondents were aware that HPV infection is a sexually transmitted disease. Less than one fourth of respondents (23.8%) indicated vaccination as an HPV infection prevention method and 51.9% of respondents correctly indicated HPV vaccine-eligible populations. Only 48.1% of respondents declared positive attitudes towards HPV vaccinations and declared that they would vaccinate their child against HPV. Males (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.11–1.85; p < 0.01), respondents who did not have children (OR: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.04–2.14; p < 0.05), as well as those who had received a higher education (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.11–1.85; p < 0.01), had greater odds of indicating positive attitudes towards HPV vaccinations. This study revealed a low level of public awareness of HPV vaccination as a cancer prevention method in Poland. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines)

9 pages, 932 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Risk Analysis by Age on the Burden of Meningococcal Disease in Spain

by Irene Rivero-Calle, Peter Francis Raguindin, Jacobo Pardo-Seco and Federico Martinon-Torres

Vaccines 2022, 10(4), 592; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10040592 - 12 Apr 2022

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 4093

Abstract

We conducted an age-based risk analysis of meningococcal disease in Spain to provide prospects on a rational vaccine schedule in pediatrics. We used the National Hospital Registry to estimate meningococcal hospitalization rate. Population census for each year was used as the denominator in computing the hospitalization rate. We computed the odds ratio of each age using <1 year old as a reference group. From 1998 to 2017, 13,554 hospitalized cases were diagnosed, with a declining trend across the years. Infants (<1 year, n = 2425) and children (1–14 years, n = 6053) comprised the majority of all hospitalized meningococcal disease in Spain (62.5% or 8474/13,554). The incidence of hospitalization decreased dramatically with age from 56.2/100,000 in <1-year-old children to 1.3/100,000 in >5-year-old children. There was a dramatic decline in risk in 1 year (OR 0.58) to 4 years of age (OR 0.21). The risk continued to decline until 13 years old. Afterward, it had a minimal upward trajectory observed at 14–17 years old (OR 0.08). Infants and adolescents are at continued risk of invasive meningococcal disease in Spain. The highest risk occurs in infants. Surveillance data, together with evidence on long-term immunogenicity and capacity for herd effect, should be considered for a more relevant immunization schedule. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 974 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Trends in COVID-19 Vaccination Intent, Determinants and Reasons for Vaccine Hesitancy: Results from Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys in the Adult General Population of Greece during November 2020–June 2021

by Vana Sypsa, Sotirios Roussos, Vasiliki Engeli, Dimitrios Paraskevis, Sotirios Tsiodras and Angelos Hatzakis

Vaccines 2022, 10(3), 470; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10030470 - 18 Mar 2022

Cited by 17 | Viewed by 2947

Abstract

Vaccine hesitancy is a major barrier to achieving large-scale COVID-19 vaccination. We report trends in vaccination intention and associated determinants from surveys in the adult general population in Greece. Four cross-sectional phone surveys were conducted in November 2020 and February, April and May 2021 on nationally representative samples of adults in Greece. Multinomial logistic regression was used on the combined data of the surveys to evaluate independent predictors of vaccination unwillingness/uncertainty. Vaccination intention increased from 67.6% in November 2020 to 84.8% in May 2021. Individuals aged 65 years or older were more willing to be vaccinated (May 2021: 92.9% vs. 79.5% in 18–39 years, p < 0.001) but between age-groups differences decreased over time. Vaccination intention increased substantially in both men and women, though earlier among men, and was higher in individuals with prograduate education (May 2021: 91.3% vs. 84.0% up to junior high). From multivariable analysis, unwillingness and/or uncertainty to be vaccinated was associated with younger age, female gender (in particular in the April 2021 survey), lower educational level and living with a child ≤12 years old. Among those with vaccine hesitancy, concerns about vaccine effectiveness declined over time (21.6% in November 2020 vs. 9.6% in May 2021, p = 0.014) and were reported more often by men; safety concerns remained stable over time (66.3% in November 2020 vs. 62.1% in May 2021, p = 0.658) and were reported more often by women. In conclusion, vaccination intention increased substantially over time. Tailored communication is needed to address vaccine hesitancy and concerns regarding vaccine safety. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 259 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V) and Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccines Adverse Events following Immunization in Patients Affected by Parkinson’s Disease and Multiple Sclerosis: A Longitudinal Study

by Giorgia Soldà, Edoardo Barvas, Jacopo Lenzi, Zeno Di Valerio, Giusy La Fauci, Susanna Guttmann, Rossano Riccardi, Maria Pia Fantini, Aurelia Salussolia, Marco Montalti and Davide Gori

Vaccines 2022, 10(3), 370; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10030370 - 26 Feb 2022

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 5018

Abstract

The Republic of San Marino COVID-19 vaccination campaign used Gam-COVID-Vac and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines. To assess adverse events following immunization (AEFIs), approximately 6000 vaccine recipients were monitored by the ROCCA study, including subgroups with Parkinson’s Disease (PD) and Multiple Sclerosis (MS). The purpose of this study is to evaluate short-term AEFIs through a 1-month follow-up. We conducted a longitudinal study, using active surveillance to evaluate the safety profiles of COVID-19 vaccines in PD and MS patients. Participants were actively administered a standardized online questionnaire to collect information on AEFIs. Among all PD and MS assisted by the San Marino hospital, a total of 82 patients completed the questionnaires. One week after administration of the first dose, vaccine recipients reported AEFIs in 26% of cases in the PD group, 67% in the MS group, and 68% in the control group. Participants reported slightly higher rates of AEFIs after dose 2 compared with dose 1, being 29%, 75%, and 78% for PD, MS, control group, respectively. Most of the reported symptoms were mild. Patients with PD and MS reported few AEFIs after administration of the COVID-19 vaccines. The frequency of AEFIs in the PD population was significantly lower than in the control group. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines)

14 pages, 1355 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Seroprevalence of Measles Antibodies in the Population of the Olomouc Region, Czech Republic—Comparison of the Results of Four Laboratories

by Michal Krupka, Tereza Matusu, Helena Sutova, Katerina Wezdenkova, Renata Vecerova, Yvona Smesna, Milan Kolar, Hana Bilkova Frankova, Jana Krivankova, Miroslav Jorenek, Zdenek Novak, Milan Raska and Ondrej Holy

Vaccines 2022, 10(2), 185; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10020185 - 25 Jan 2022

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 3294

Abstract

Objectives: Although the incidence of measles has decreased globally since the introduction of regular vaccination, its frequency has increased again in recent years. The study is focused on data from the Olomouc Region in the Czech Republic analyzed in four laboratories. The obtained results were compared with already published data. Methods: The data were provided by individual laboratories in an anonymized form—age at the time of the examination, sex, and result of test. Samples were collected between June 2018 and September 2019 and evaluated on the scale positive–borderline–negative. Results: A total of 7962 sera samples were evaluated using three different methods—two types of ELISA tests and CLIA. Positive result was issued in a total of 62.6 percent of samples, but the results of individual laboratories varied widely from 55.5 to 70.8 percent. However, the same trend with the highest levels of antibodies in people born before beginning of vaccination was observed. Conclusions: Data show significantly different results depending on the individual laboratories and the detection kits used. The underestimation of the proportion of positive results can cause problems in selecting individuals for revaccination with a live vaccine, which may fail in weakly positive individuals. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 1283 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Increasing Uptake of Maternal Pertussis Vaccinations through Funded Administration in Community Pharmacies

by Anna S. Howe, Natalie J. Gauld, Alana Y. Cavadino, Helen Petousis-Harris, Felicity Dumble, Owen Sinclair and Cameron C. Grant

Vaccines 2022, 10(2), 150; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10020150 - 20 Jan 2022

Cited by 12 | Viewed by 3422

Abstract

Although maternal pertussis vaccination is recommended, uptake is suboptimal in New Zealand (NZ), despite full funding in general practice and hospitals. We determined whether funding maternal pertussis vaccination in community pharmacy increases its uptake. Pertussis vaccination during pregnancy was compared between non-contiguous, demographically similar regions of NZ. The pertussis vaccine was funded at pharmacies from Nov 2016 in one NZ region (Waikato), but not in comparator regions (Northland, Hawkes Bay). Vaccinations during pregnancy were determined from the National Immunisation Register, general practice and pharmacy claims data, and a maternity database. Comparisons were made using adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for Nov 2015 to Oct 2016 versus Nov 2016 to Oct 2019. The odds of pregnancy pertussis vaccination increased in the post-intervention versus pre-intervention period with this increase being larger (p = 0.0014) in the intervention (35% versus 21%, OR = 2.07, 95% CI 1.89–2.27) versus the control regions (38% versus 26%, OR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.52–1.84). Coverage was lower for Māori versus non-Māori, but increased more for Māori in the intervention versus control regions (117% versus 38% increase). It was found that funding maternal pertussis vaccination in pharmacy increases uptake, particularly for Māori women. Measures to increase coverage should include reducing barriers to vaccines being offered by non-traditional providers, including pharmacies. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1499 KiB

Open AccessEditor’s ChoiceArticle

Reduced Titers of Circulating Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies and Risk of COVID-19 Infection in Healthcare Workers during the Nine Months after Immunization with the BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine

by Luca Coppeta, Cristiana Ferrari, Giuseppina Somma, Andrea Mazza, Umberto D’Ancona, Fabbio Marcuccilli, Sandro Grelli, Marco Trabucco Aurilio, Antonio Pietroiusti, Andrea Magrini and Stefano Rizza

Vaccines 2022, 10(2), 141; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10020141 - 18 Jan 2022

Cited by 35 | Viewed by 3665

Abstract

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has had a tremendous impact on health services; hundreds of thousands of healthcare workers (HCWs) have died from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The introduction of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in Italy provided recipients with significant protection against COVID-19 within one to two weeks after the administration of the second of the two recommended doses. While the vaccine induces a robust T cell response, the protective role of factors and pathways other than those related to memory B cell responses to specific SARS-CoV-2 antigens remains unclear. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the determinants of serological protection in a group of vaccinated HCWs (n = 793) by evaluating circulating levels of antiviral spike receptor-binding domain (S-RBD) antibodies during the nine-month period following vaccination. We found that 99.5% of the HCWs who received the two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine developed protective antibodies that were maintained at detectable levels for as long as 250 days after the second dose of the vaccine. Multivariate analysis was performed on anti-S-RBD titers in a subgroup of participants (n = 173) that were evaluated twice during this period. The results of this analysis reveal that the antibody titer observed at the second time point was significantly related to the magnitude of the primary response, the time that had elapsed between the first and the second evaluation, and a previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of importance is the finding that despite waning antibody titers following vaccination, none of the study participants contracted severe COVID-19 during the observational period. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

11 pages, 1081 KiB

Open AccessReview

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: The Perils of Peddling Science by Social Media and the Lay Press

by Shabeer Ali Thorakkattil, Suhaj Abdulsalim, Mohammed Salim Karattuthodi, Mazhuvanchery Kesavan Unnikrishnan, Muhammed Rashid and Girish Thunga

Vaccines 2022, 10(7), 1059; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10071059 - 30 Jun 2022

Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2955

Abstract

Introduction: Vaccines are the best tools to end the pandemic, and their public acceptance is crucial in achieving herd immunity. Despite global efforts to increase access to vaccination, the World Health Organization explicitly lists vaccination hesitancy (VH) as a significant threat. Despite robust safety reports from regulatory authorities and public health advisories, a substantial proportion of the community remains obsessed with the hazards of vaccination. This calls for identifying and eliminating possible causative elements, among which this study investigates the inappropriate dissemination of medical literature concerning COVID-19 and adverse events following immunization (AEFI), its influence on promoting VH, and proposals for overcoming this problem in the future. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases, using the keywords “adverse events following immunization (AEFI)”, “COVID-19”, “vaccines” and “hesitancy” and related medical and subjective headings (MeSH) up to 31 March 2022, and extracted studies relevant to the COVID-19 AEFI and associated VH. Finally, 47 articles were chosen to generate a narrative synthesis. Results: The databases depicted a steep rise in publications on COVID-19 AEFI and COVID-19 VH from January 2021 onwards. The articles depicted multiple events of mild AEFIs without fatal events in recipients. While documenting AEFIs is praiseworthy, publishing such reports without prior expert surveillance can exaggerate public apprehension and inappropriately fuel VH. VH is a deep-rooted phenomenon, but it is difficult to zero in on the exact reason for it. Spreading rumors/misinformation on COVID-19 vaccines might be an important provocation for VH, which includes indiscriminately reporting AEFI on a massive scale. While a number of reported AEFIs fall within the acceptable limits in the course of extensive COVID-19 vaccinations, it is important to critically evaluate and moderate the reporting and dissemination of AEFI in order to allay panic. Conclusions: Vaccination programs are necessary to end any pandemic, and VH may be attributed to multiple reasons. VH may be assuaged by initiating educational programs on the importance of vaccination, raising public awareness and monitoring the inappropriate dissemination of misleading information. Government-initiated strategies can potentially restrict random AEFI reports from lay epidemiologists and healthcare practitioners. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

30 pages, 1600 KiB

Open AccessReview

COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers—A Review

by Christopher J. Peterson, Benjamin Lee and Kenneth Nugent

Vaccines 2022, 10(6), 948; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10060948 - 15 Jun 2022

Cited by 115 | Viewed by 15851

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated vaccine have highlighted vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers (HCWs). Vaccine hesitancy among this group existed prior to the pandemic and particularly centered around influenza vaccination. Being a physician, having more advanced education, and previous vaccination habits are frequently associated with vaccine acceptance. The relationship between age and caring for patients on COVID-19 vaccination is unclear, with studies providing opposing results. Reasons for hesitancy include concerns about safety and efficacy, mistrust of government and institutions, waiting for more data, and feeling that personal rights are being infringed upon. Many of these reasons reflect previous attitudes about influenza vaccination as well as political beliefs and views of personal autonomy. Finally, several interventions to encourage vaccination have been studied, including education programs and non-monetary incentives with the most effective studies using a combination of methods. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines)

► Show Figures

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Feature Papers of Epidemiology and Vaccines

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editor

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

Related Special Issue

Published Papers (9 papers)

Research

Review

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI