Challenges in ensuring global access to COVID-19 vaccines: production, affordability, allocation, and deployment

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic is unlikely to end until there is global roll-out of vaccines that protect against severe disease and preferably drive herd immunity. Regulators in numerous countries have authorised or approved COVID-19 vaccines for human use, with more expected to be licensed in 2021. Yet having licensed vaccines is not enough to achieve global control of COVID-19: they also need to be produced at scale, priced affordably, allocated globally so that they are available where needed, and widely deployed in local communities. In this Health Policy paper, we review potential challenges to success in each of these dimensions and discuss policy implications. To guide our review, we developed a dashboard to highlight key characteristics of 26 leading vaccine candidates, including efficacy levels, dosing regimens, storage requirements, prices, production capacities in 2021, and stocks reserved for low-income and middle-income countries. We use a traffic-light system to signal the potential contributions of each candidate to achieving global vaccine immunity, highlighting important trade-offs that policy makers need to consider when developing and implementing vaccination programmes. Although specific datapoints are subject to change as the pandemic response progresses, the dashboard will continue to provide a useful lens through which to analyse the key issues affecting the use of COVID-19 vaccines. We also present original data from a 32-country survey (n=26 758) on potential acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines, conducted from October to December, 2020. Vaccine acceptance was highest in Vietnam (98%), India (91%), China (91%), Denmark (87%), and South Korea (87%), and lowest in Serbia (38%), Croatia (41%), France (44%), Lebanon (44%), and Paraguay (51%).

Related collections

Most cited references 76

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Is Open Access

Vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants.

Noni MacDonald (2015)

The SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy concluded that vaccine hesitancy refers to delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services. Vaccine hesitancy is complex and context specific, varying across time, place and vaccines. It is influenced by factors such as complacency, convenience and confidence. The Working Group retained the term 'vaccine' rather than 'vaccination' hesitancy, although the latter more correctly implies the broader range of immunization concerns, as vaccine hesitancy is the more commonly used term. While high levels of hesitancy lead to low vaccine demand, low levels of hesitancy do not necessarily mean high vaccine demand. The Vaccine Hesitancy Determinants Matrix displays the factors influencing the behavioral decision to accept, delay or reject some or all vaccines under three categories: contextual, individual and group, and vaccine/vaccination-specific influences.

0 comments Cited 1720 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine

Jeffrey V Lazarus, Scott C Ratzan, Adam Palayew … (2020)

Several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently in human trials. In June 2020, we surveyed 13,426 people in 19 countries to determine potential acceptance rates and factors influencing acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, and 61.4% reported that they would accept their employer’s recommendation to do so. Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia). Respondents reporting higher levels of trust in information from government sources were more likely to accept a vaccine and take their employer’s advice to do so.

0 comments Cited 1221 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Understanding vaccine hesitancy around vaccines and vaccination from a global perspective: a systematic review of published literature, 2007-2012.

Heidi Larson, Caitlin Jarrett, Elisabeth Eckersberger … (2014)

Vaccine "hesitancy" is an emerging term in the literature and discourse on vaccine decision-making and determinants of vaccine acceptance. It recognizes a continuum between the domains of vaccine acceptance and vaccine refusal and de-polarizes previous characterization of individuals and groups as either anti-vaccine or pro-vaccine. The primary aims of this systematic review are to: 1) identify research on vaccine hesitancy; 2) identify determinants of vaccine hesitancy in different settings including its context-specific causes, its expression and its impact; and 3) inform the development of a model for assessing determinants of vaccine hesitancy in different settings as proposed by the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts Working Group (SAGE WG) for dealing with vaccine hesitancy. A broad search strategy, built to capture multiple dimensions of public trust, confidence and hesitancy around vaccines, was applied across multiple databases. Peer-reviewed studies were selected for inclusion if they focused on childhood vaccines [≤ 7 years of age], used multivariate analyses, and were published between January 2007 and November 2012. Our results show a variety of factors as being associated with vaccine hesitancy but they do not allow for a complete classification and confirmation of their independent and relative strength of influence. Determinants of vaccine hesitancy are complex and context-specific - varying across time, place and vaccines. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 623 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Lancet

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Lancet

Title: Lancet (London, England)

Publisher: Elsevier Ltd.

ISSN (Print): 0140-6736

ISSN (Electronic): 1474-547X

Publication date PMC-release: 12 February 2021

Publication date (Electronic): 12 February 2021

Affiliations

[a ]Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK

[b ]Department of International Development, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK

[c ]Oxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

[d ]NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, UK

[e ]Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK

[f ]Department of Health Metrics Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

[g ]Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program, Ministry of Public Health, Thailand

[h ]Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore

Author notes

[* ]Correspondence to: Dr Olivier J Wouters, Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London WC2A 2AE, UK

Article

Publisher Item ID: S0140-6736(21)00306-8

DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00306-8

PMC ID: 7906643

PubMed ID: 33587887

SO-VID: b8cd0eec-6f59-459e-818d-51a6556a8682

License:

Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.