FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4328103271> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4328103271 endingPage "e163" @default.
• W4328103271 startingPage "e162" @default.
• W4328103271 abstract "We would like to thank Kleebayoon and colleagues for their thoughtful commentary on our article entitled Brief Report: Declining Rates of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Uptake Among Patients with Thoracic Malignancies.1Meador CB, Naranbhai V, Hambelton G, et al. Brief report: declining rates of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine uptake among patients with thoracic malignancies. Clin Lung Cancer. 2023 Jan 25; S1525-7304(23)00011-6.Google Scholar As these authors point out, variables affecting the rate of vaccine uptake are complex, and a more comprehensive understanding of factors contributing to vaccination habits is necessary to improve adherence to public health guidelines. We agree with the authors’ assertions that individuals’ degree of confidence in public health infrastructure and level of awareness surrounding rapidly evolving recommendations are both relevant factors for adherence to recommended vaccine schedules. It should be noted, also, that factors affecting an individual's decision to receive the initial vaccine series versus subsequent ‘booster’ doses against SARS-CoV-2 may also be slightly different. Moreover, an individual without co-morbid medical conditions is likely to approach the decision with a different perspective than someone living with lung cancer. While true vaccine hesitancy is its own topic of research and public dialogue, our data were generated amongst a population of patients who were fully amenable to initial vaccination, as evidenced by their voluntary enrollment in a clinical study requiring initial SARS-CoV-2 vaccination as a criteria for participation.2Naranbhai V Pernat CA Gavralidis A et al.Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with cancer: the CANVAX cohort study.J Clin Oncol. 2022; 40: 12-23Crossref PubMed Scopus (45) Google Scholar Even among this selected population, we observed declining rates of subsequent recommended vaccinations. While the precise reasons for this decline are not known, we hypothesize that factors could include changes in health status, prior breakthrough infections, or safety concerns.1Meador CB, Naranbhai V, Hambelton G, et al. Brief report: declining rates of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine uptake among patients with thoracic malignancies. Clin Lung Cancer. 2023 Jan 25; S1525-7304(23)00011-6.Google Scholar In addition, the challenges of patients and providers alike to keep up with rapidly evolving vaccine recommendations also likely played a role. Factors affecting booster vaccine uptake are a focus of study for research groups around the world, and their data can shed further light on our findings. For example, the recently published iCARE study reported factors affecting the decision to receive or decline SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccine among a cohort of 3001 adults in Canada.3Leger C Deslauriers F Gosselin Boucher V Phillips M Bacon SL Lavoie KL Prevalence and motivators of getting a COVID-19 booster vaccine in Canada: results from the iCARE study.Vaccines (Basel). 2023; 11: 291Crossref PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar In their study, the authors describe that a primary factor influencing the decision to receive a booster vaccine was opinion (either favorable or negative) regarding efficacy. A prominent differentiating factor for individuals who declined booster doses was a concern about vaccine safety, whereas individuals who received the booster vaccine commonly cited a desire to protect others around them as a strong motivating factor. The authors also report that older age and concurrent diagnosis of a chronic disease were factors significantly associated with decision to get a booster vaccine. In a separate study analyzing survey data from a cohort of 3,497 individuals in the United States, Bennett and colleagues report that lack of trust in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine efficacy or in governmental agencies may affect booster uptake, though the authors emphasize the variability between individuals regarding specific motivations to decline or receive the vaccine.4Bennett NG Bloom DE Ferranna M. Factors underlying COVID-19 vaccine and booster hesitancy and refusal, and incentivizing vaccine adoption.PLoS One. 2022; 17e0274529Crossref Scopus (8) Google Scholar Other recent reports describe factors such as concerns about vaccine utility, time to vaccine development, shifting public health messaging, and views of others in one's community as determinants in booster vaccine uptake in populations studied in the United States, Canada, and Jordan.5Al-Qerem W Al Bawab AQ Hammad A Ling J Alasmari F Willingness of the Jordanian population to receive a COVID-19 booster dose: a cross-sectional study.Vaccines (Basel). 2022; 10: 410Crossref PubMed Scopus (36) Google Scholar, 6Hagger MS Hamilton K. Predicting COVID-19 booster vaccine intentions.Appl Psychol Health Well Being. 2022; 14: 819-841Crossref PubMed Scopus (22) Google Scholar, 7Capurro G Tustin J Jardine CG Driedger SM. When good messages go wrong: perspectives on COVID-19 vaccines and vaccine communication from generally vaccine accepting individuals in Canada.Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2022; 182145822Crossref PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar In sum, available data suggest that decision-making regarding SARS-CoV-2 booster doses can be affected by a variety of factors that involve common themes but may vary unpredictably for a given individual. These and other emerging data regarding public perception of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination can help inform efforts to develop increasingly clear vaccine messaging. In addition to recommendations from public health officials, individual communication with medical oncologists can also play a central role in vaccine decision-making for patients with lung cancer. Often seen as a trusted source of health-related information, medical oncologists schedule frequent office visits with patients and have specific expertise regarding immunosuppressive effects of cancer-directed therapies. These factors put them in a prime position to participate in discussions with patients regarding recommended vaccine schedules. We hope that our data can add to the collective understanding of areas for improvement in vaccine communication. This is especially important as we enter the fourth year of the Covid-19 pandemic, as bivalent vaccines have been developed to confer broadening immunity against evolving strains of SARS-CoV-2, and iterative development of future vaccines is all but certain in the years to come." @default.
• W4328103271 created "2023-03-22" @default.
• W4328103271 creator A5081227348 @default.
• W4328103271 date "2023-07-01" @default.
• W4328103271 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W4328103271 title "Letter to the Editor Reply: Kleebayoon et al." @default.
• W4328103271 cites W4213033078 @default.
• W4328103271 cites W4221022916 @default.
• W4328103271 cites W4226094308 @default.
• W4328103271 cites W4296741012 @default.
• W4328103271 cites W4310567293 @default.
• W4328103271 cites W4318479000 @default.
• W4328103271 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2023.03.011" @default.
• W4328103271 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37032266" @default.
• W4328103271 hasPublicationYear "2023" @default.
• W4328103271 type Work @default.
• W4328103271 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4328103271 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4328103271 hasAuthorship W4328103271A5081227348 @default.
• W4328103271 hasBestOaLocation W43281032711 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C138816342 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C143998085 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C159110408 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C203014093 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C22070199 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C2776256026 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C2777704310 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C2780868878 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C8891405 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C138816342 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C143998085 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C159110408 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C203014093 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C22070199 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C2776256026 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C2777704310 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C2780868878 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C2908647359 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C512399662 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C71924100 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C8891405 @default.
• W4328103271 hasConceptScore W4328103271C99454951 @default.
• W4328103271 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W4328103271 hasLocation W43281032711 @default.
• W4328103271 hasLocation W43281032712 @default.
• W4328103271 hasLocation W43281032713 @default.
• W4328103271 hasOpenAccess W4328103271 @default.
• W4328103271 hasPrimaryLocation W43281032711 @default.
• W4328103271 hasRelatedWork W1941977522 @default.
• W4328103271 hasRelatedWork W2033265148 @default.
• W4328103271 hasRelatedWork W2048676702 @default.
• W4328103271 hasRelatedWork W2408404678 @default.
• W4328103271 hasRelatedWork W2805823297 @default.
• W4328103271 hasRelatedWork W3098560540 @default.
• W4328103271 hasRelatedWork W3212313869 @default.
• W4328103271 hasRelatedWork W4290258953 @default.
• W4328103271 hasRelatedWork W4368362065 @default.
• W4328103271 hasRelatedWork W4379259746 @default.
• W4328103271 hasVolume "24" @default.
• W4328103271 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4328103271 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4328103271 workType "letter" @default.