Last data update: Sep 23, 2024. (Total: 47723 publications since 2009)
Records 1-5 (of 5 Records) |
Query Trace: Razi S [original query] |
---|
A Scoping Review of Factors used to Explain Disparities in COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions and Uptake among People of Color-United States, December 1, 2020-April 30, 2021 (preprint)
Wilson RF , Kota KK , Sheats KJ , Luna-Pinto C , Owens C , Harrison DD , Razi S . medRxiv 2023 13 Background: Vaccine access, coupled with the belief that vaccines are important, beneficial, and safe, plays a pivotal role in achieving high levels of vaccination to reduce the spread and severity of COVID-19 in the United States (U.S.) and globally. Many factors can influence vaccine intentions and uptake. Method(s): We conducted a scoping review of factors (e.g., access-related factors, racism) known to influence vaccine intentions and uptake, using publications from various databases and websites published December 1, 2020-April 30, 2021. Descriptive statistics were used to present results. Result(s): Overall, 1094 publications were identified through the database search, of which 133 were included in this review. Among the publications included, over 60% included mistrust in vaccines and vaccine-safety concerns, 43% included racism/discrimination, 35% included lack of vaccine access (35%), and 8% had no contextual factors when reporting on vaccine intentions and disparities in vaccine uptake. Conclusion(s): Findings revealed during a critical period when there was a well-defined goal for adult COVID-19 vaccination in the U.S., some publications included several contextual factors while others provided limited or no contextual factors when reporting on disparities in vaccine intentions and uptake. Failing to contextualize inequities and other factors that influence vaccine intentions and uptake might be perceived as placing responsibility for vaccination status on the individual, consequently, leaving social and structural inequities that impact vaccination rates and vaccine confidence, among people of color, intact. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. This article is a US Government work. It is not subject to copyright under 17 USC 105 and is also made available for use under a CC0 license. |
Call out racism and inequity in reports on vaccine intentions
Wilson RF , Kota KK , Sheats KJ , Luna-Pinto C , Owens C , Harrison DD , Razi S . Nat Hum Behav 2023 7 (3) 300-302 The language used when reporting racial and ethnic disparities in vaccine intentions and uptake must evolve to reflect social and structural inequities. To achieve health equity, we must acknowledge the extent to which racism and health inequities serve as barriers to vaccine-seeking behaviours among people of colour. | | During the early stages of the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines in the USA, uptake of COVID-19 vaccines was higher among White, non-Hispanic persons as compared with people of colour (that is, American Indian or Alaska Native, non-Hispanic; Black, non-Hispanic; Hispanic; and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic persons). These early racial and ethnic disparities in vaccination rates led many news stories, journal articles and other reports to perpetuate a narrative that disparities in the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among people of colour were largely driven by vaccine hesitancy, while neglecting to focus on health inequities and other factors as drivers of disparities in vaccine intentions and uptake. |
Promoting health equity during the COVID-19 pandemic, United States.
Moore JT , Luna-Pinto C , Cox H , Razi S , St Louis ME , Ricaldi JN , Liburd L . Bull World Health Organ 2022 100 (2) 171-173 The United States of America has a diverse population of over 331 million people.1 Groups historically identified as racial and ethnic minorities (which make up more than one third of the US population)1 have been economically and socially marginalized, leading to lower access to education, health care and financial capital, therefore putting some of these groups at increased risk for poor health outcomes.2 The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has amplified existing health inequities; disparities in COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations and deaths, and now vaccination rates, have been identified.3,4 Here, we provide a high-level summary of strategies implemented by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to address COVID-19 inequities impacting racial and ethnic minority groups. |
Smokefree policies to reduce tobacco use: a systematic review
Hopkins DP , Razi S , Leeks KD , Priya Kalra G , Chattopadhyay SK , Soler RE . Am J Prev Med 2010 38 S275-89 In 2001, a systematic review for the Guide to Community Preventive Services identified strong evidence of effectiveness of smoking bans and restrictions in reducing exposure to environmental (secondhand) tobacco smoke. As follow-up to that earlier review, the focus here was on the evidence on effectiveness of smokefree policies in reducing tobacco use. Smokefree policies implemented by worksites or communities prohibit smoking in workplaces and designated public areas. The conceptual approach was modified for this review; an updated search for evidence was conducted; and the available evidence was evaluated. Published articles that met quality criteria and evaluated changes in tobacco-use prevalence or cessation were included in the review. A total of 57 studies were identified in the period 1976 through June 2005 that met criteria to be candidates for review; of these, 37 met study design and quality of execution criteria to qualify for final assessment. Twenty-one studies measured absolute differences in tobacco-use prevalence with a median effect of -3.4 percentage points (interquartile interval: -6.3 to -1.4 percentage points). Eleven studies measured differences in tobacco-use cessation among tobacco users exposed to a smokefree policy compared with tobacco users not exposed to a smokefree policy. The median absolute change was an increase in cessation of 6.4 percentage points (interquartile interval: 1.3 to 7.9 percentage points). The qualifying studies provided sufficient evidence that smokefree policies reduce tobacco use among workers when implemented in worksites or by communities. Finally, a systematic economic review identified four studies that, overall, demonstrated economic benefits from a smokefree workplace policy. Additional research is needed to more fully evaluate the total economic effects of these policies. |
A systematic review of selected interventions for worksite health promotion: The assessment of health risks with feedback
Soler RE , Leeks KD , Razi S , Hopkins DP , Griffith M , Aten A , Chattopadhyay SK , Smith SC , Habarta N , Goetzel RZ , Pronk NP , Richling DE , Bauer DR , Buchanan LR , Florence CS , Koonin L , MacLean D , Rosenthal A , Matson Koffman D , Grizzell JV , Walker AM , Task Force on Community Preventive Services . Am J Prev Med 2010 38 S237-62 BACKGROUND: Many health behaviors and physiologic indicators can be used to estimate one's likelihood of illness or premature death. Methods have been developed to assess this risk, most notably the use of a health-risk assessment or biometric screening tool. This report provides recommendations on the effectiveness of interventions that use an Assessment of Health Risks with Feedback (AHRF) when used alone or as part of a broader worksite health promotion program to improve the health of employees. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The Guide to Community Preventive Services' methods for systematic reviews were used to evaluate the effectiveness of AHRF when used alone and when used in combination with other intervention components. Effectiveness was assessed on the basis of changes in health behaviors and physiologic estimates, but was also informed by changes in risk estimates, healthcare service use, and worker productivity. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The review team identified strong evidence of effectiveness of AHRF when used with health education with or without other intervention components for five outcomes. There is sufficient evidence of effectiveness for four additional outcomes assessed. There is insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness for others such as changes in body composition and fruit and vegetable intake. The team also found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of AHRF when implemented alone. CONCLUSIONS: The results of these reviews indicate that AHRF is useful as a gateway intervention to a broader worksite health promotion program that includes health education lasting > or =1 hour or repeating multiple times during 1 year, and that may include an array of health promotion activities. These reviews form the basis of the recommendations by the Task Force on Community Preventive Services presented elsewhere in this supplement. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:Sep 23, 2024
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure