Search

Between 1997 and 2021, the number of children looked after (CLA) in Wales, UK, increased steadily, with stark inequalities. We aimed to assess how deprivation and maternal and child perinatal characteristics influence the risk of becoming CLA in Wales. We constructed a prospective longitudinal cohort of children born in Wales between April 2006 and March 2021 (n = 395,610) using linked administrative records. Survival models examined the risk of CLA from birth by small-area deprivation and maternal and child perinatal characteristics. Population attributable fractions quantify the potential impact of action on modifiable risk factors. Children from the most deprived fifth of the population were 3.4 times more likely to enter care than those in the least deprived (demographic adjusted hazard ratios [aHRs] 3.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.08, 3.74). Maternal mental health problems in pregnancy (fully aHR, 2.03, 95% CI 1.88, 2.19) and behavioural factors, such as smoking (aHR 2.46, 95% CI 2.34–2.60), alcohol problems (aHR 2.35, 95% CI 1.70–3.23) and substance use in pregnancy (aHR 5.72, 95% CI 5.03–6.51), as well as child congenital anomalies (aHR 1.46, 95% CI 1.16–1.84), low birth weight (aHR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17, 1.39) and preterm birth (aHR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06, 1.26), were associated with higher risk of CLA status. The risk of CLA in the population may be reduced by 35% (95% CI 0.33, 0.38) if children in the two most deprived fifths of the population experienced the conditions of those in the least deprived. Deprivation and perinatal maternal health are important modifiable risk factors for children becoming CLA. Our analysis provides insight into the mechanisms of intergenerational transfer of disadvantage in a vulnerable section of the child population and identifies targets for public health action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aims to create a national ethnicity spine based on all available ethnicity records in linkable anonymised electronic health record and administrative data sources., Design: A longitudinal study using anonymised individual-level population-scale ethnicity data from 26 data sources available within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank., Setting: The national ethnicity spine is created based on longitudinal national data for the population of Wales-UK over 22 years (between 2000 and 2021)., Procedure and Participants: A total of 46 million ethnicity records for 4 297 694 individuals have been extracted, harmonised, deduplicated and made available within a longitudinal research ready data asset., Outcome Measures: (1) Comparing the distribution of ethnicity records over time for four different selection approaches (latest, mode, weighted mode and composite) across age bands, sex, deprivation quintiles, health board and residential location and (2) distribution and completeness of records against the ONS census 2011., Results: The distribution of the dominant group (white) is minimally affected based on the four different selection approaches. Across all other ethnic group categorisations, the mixed group was most susceptible to variation in distribution depending on the selection approach used and varied from a 0.6% prevalence across the latest and mode approach to a 1.1% prevalence for the weighted mode, compared with the 3.1% prevalence for the composite approach. Substantial alignment was observed with ONS 2011 census with the Latest group method (kappa=0.68, 95% CI (0.67 to 0.71)) across all subgroups. The record completeness rate was over 95% in 2021., Conclusion: In conclusion, our development of the population-scale ethnicity spine provides robust ethnicity measures for healthcare research in Wales and a template which can easily be deployed in other trusted research environments in the UK and beyond., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KK is Director of the University Centre for Ethnic Health Research, Trustee of the South Asian Health Foundation, Chair of the Ethnicity subgroup of the UK Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) and member of SAGE. RL is a member of the Welsh Government COVID-19 Technical Advisory Group. RKO is a member of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Technology Appraisal Committee, a member of the NICE Decision Support Unit (DSU) and an associate member of the NICE Technical Support Unit (TSU). She has provided unrelated methodological advice as a paid consultant to the pharmaceutical industry. She reports teaching fees from the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) and the University of Bristol., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: We investigated SARS-CoV-2 infection trends, risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination uptake among school staff, students and their household members in Wales, UK., Design: Seven-day average of SARS-CoV-2 infections and polymerase chain reaction tests per 1000 people daily, cumulative incidence of COVID-19 vaccination uptake and multi-level Poisson models with time-varying covariates., Setting: National electronic cohort between September 2020 and May 2022 when several variants were predominant in the UK (Alpha, Delta and Omicron)., Participants: School students aged 4 to 10/11 years (primary school and younger middle school, n  = 238,163), and 11 to 15/16 years (secondary school and older middle school, n  = 182,775), school staff in Wales ( n  = 47,963) and the household members of students and staff ( n  = 697,659)., Main Outcome Measures: SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination uptake., Results: School students had a sustained period of high infection rates compared with household members after August 2021. Primary schedule vaccination uptake was highest among staff (96.3%) but lower for household members (72.2%), secondary and older middle school students (59.8%), and primary and younger middle school students (3.3%). Multi-level Poisson models showed that vaccination was associated with a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The Delta variant posed a greater infection risk for students than the Alpha variant. However, Omicron was a larger risk for staff and household members., Conclusions: Public health bodies should be informed of the protection COVID-19 vaccines afford, with more research being required for younger populations. Furthermore, schools require additional support in managing new, highly transmissible variants. Further research should examine the mechanisms between child deprivation and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Purpose: Public health measures instituted at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK in 2020 had profound effects on the cancer patient pathway. We hypothesise that this may have affected analgesic prescriptions for cancer patients in primary care., Methods: A whole-nation retrospective, observational study of opioid and antineuropathic analgesics prescribed in primary care for two cohorts of cancer patients in Wales, using linked anonymised data to evaluate the impact of the pandemic and variation between different demographic backgrounds., Results: We found a significant increase in strong opioid prescriptions during the pandemic for patients within their first 12 months of diagnosis with a common cancer (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.15, 95% CI: 1.12-1.18, p < 0.001 for strong opioids) and significant increases in strong opioid and antineuropathic prescriptions for patients in the last 3 months prior to a cancer-related death (IRR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.04-1.07, p < 0.001 for strong opioids; IRR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.08-1.14, p < 0.001 for antineuropathics). A spike in opioid prescriptions for patients diagnosed in Q2 2020 and those who died in Q2 2020 was observed and interpreted as stockpiling. More analgesics were prescribed in more deprived quintiles. This differential was less pronounced in patients towards the end of life, which we attribute to closer professional supervision., Conclusions: We demonstrate significant changes to community analgesic prescriptions for cancer patients related to the UK pandemic and illustrate prescription patterns linked to patients' demographic background., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic there was an urgent need to identify individuals at highest risk of severe outcomes, such as hospitalisation and death following infection. The QCOVID risk prediction algorithms emerged as key tools in facilitating this which were further developed during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic to identify groups of people at highest risk of severe COVID-19 related outcomes following one or two doses of vaccine., Objectives: To externally validate the QCOVID3 algorithm based on primary and secondary care records for Wales, UK., Methods: We conducted an observational, prospective cohort based on electronic health care records for 1.66m vaccinated adults living in Wales on 8th December 2020, with follow-up until 15th June 2021. Follow-up started from day 14 post vaccination to allow the full effect of the vaccine., Results: The scores produced by the QCOVID3 risk algorithm showed high levels of discrimination for both COVID-19 related deaths and hospital admissions and good calibration (Harrell C statistic: ≥ 0.828)., Conclusion: This validation of the updated QCOVID3 risk algorithms in the adult vaccinated Welsh population has shown that the algorithms are valid for use in the Welsh population, and applicable on a population independent of the original study, which has not been previously reported. This study provides further evidence that the QCOVID algorithms can help inform public health risk management on the ongoing surveillance and intervention to manage COVID-19 related risks., Competing Interests: KK is Chair of the Ethnicity Subgroup of the UK Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) and Member of SAGE. AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group, the Scottish Government’s Standing Committee on Pandemic Preparedness, the UK Government’s New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG) Risk Stratification Subgroup, the Department of Health and Social Care’s COVID-19 Therapeutics Modelling Group and was a member of Astra-Zeneca’s COVID-19 Strategic Thrombocytopenia Taskforce. All AS’ roles are unfunded. JHC is a member of SAGE subgroups and chair of the NERVTAG subgroup on risk stratification and several DHSC therapeutics modelling advisory groups. RAL is a member of the Welsh Government COVID-19 Technical Advisory Group., (Copyright: © 2023 Lyons et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: From September 2021, Health Care Workers (HCWs) in Wales began receiving a COVID-19 booster vaccination. This is the first dose beyond the primary vaccination schedule. Given the emergence of new variants, vaccine waning vaccine, and increasing vaccination hesitancy, there is a need to understand booster vaccine uptake and subsequent breakthrough in this high-risk population., Methods: We conducted a prospective, national-scale, observational cohort study of HCWs in Wales using anonymised, linked data from the SAIL Databank. We analysed uptake of COVID-19 booster vaccinations from September 2021 to February 2022, with comparisons against uptake of the initial primary vaccination schedule. We also analysed booster breakthrough, in the form of PCR-confirmed SARS-Cov-2 infection, comparing to the second primary dose. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate associations for vaccination uptake and breakthrough regarding staff roles, socio-demographics, household composition, and other factors., Results: We derived a cohort of 73,030 HCWs living in Wales (78% female, 60% 18-49 years old). Uptake was quickest amongst HCWs aged 60 + years old (aHR 2.54, 95%CI 2.45-2.63), compared with those aged 18-29. Asian HCWs had quicker uptake (aHR 1.18, 95%CI 1.14-1.22), whilst Black HCWs had slower uptake (aHR 0.67, 95%CI 0.61-0.74), compared to white HCWs. HCWs residing in the least deprived areas were slightly quicker to have received a booster dose (aHR 1.12, 95%CI 1.09-1.16), compared with those in the most deprived areas. Strongest associations with breakthrough infections were found for those living with children (aHR 1.52, 95%CI 1.41-1.63), compared to two-adult only households. HCWs aged 60 + years old were less likely to get breakthrough infections, compared to those aged 18-29 (aHR 0.42, 95%CI 0.38-0.47)., Conclusion: Vaccination uptake was consistently lower among black HCWs, as well as those from deprived areas. Whilst breakthrough infections were highest in households with children., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been shown to provide protection against COVID-19 hospitalization and death. However, some evidence suggests that notable waning in effectiveness against these outcomes occurs within months of vaccination. We undertook a pooled analysis across the four nations of the UK to investigate waning in vaccine effectiveness (VE) and relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) against severe COVID-19 outcomes., Methods: We carried out a target trial design for first/second doses of ChAdOx1(Oxford-AstraZeneca) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) with a composite outcome of COVID-19 hospitalization or death over the period 8 December 2020 to 30 June 2021. Exposure groups were matched by age, local authority area and propensity for vaccination. We pooled event counts across the four UK nations., Results: For Doses 1 and 2 of ChAdOx1 and Dose 1 of BNT162b2, VE/rVE reached zero by approximately Days 60-80 and then went negative. By Day 70, VE/rVE was -25% (95% CI: -80 to 14) and 10% (95% CI: -32 to 39) for Doses 1 and 2 of ChAdOx1, respectively, and 42% (95% CI: 9 to 64) and 53% (95% CI: 26 to 70) for Doses 1 and 2 of BNT162b2, respectively. rVE for Dose 2 of BNT162b2 remained above zero throughout and reached 46% (95% CI: 13 to 67) after 98 days of follow-up., Conclusions: We found strong evidence of waning in VE/rVE for Doses 1 and 2 of ChAdOx1, as well as Dose 1 of BNT162b2. This evidence may be used to inform policies on timings of additional doses of vaccine., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.)

Background: The CVD-COVID-UK consortium was formed to understand the relationship between COVID-19 and cardiovascular diseases through analyses of harmonised electronic health records (EHRs) across the four UK nations. Beyond COVID-19, data harmonisation and common approaches enable analysis within and across independent Trusted Research Environments. Here we describe the reproducible harmonisation method developed using large-scale EHRs in Wales to accommodate the fast and efficient implementation of cross-nation analysis in England and Wales as part of the CVD-COVID-UK programme. We characterise current challenges and share lessons learnt., Methods: Serving the scope and scalability of multiple study protocols, we used linked, anonymised individual-level EHR, demographic and administrative data held within the SAIL Databank for the population of Wales. The harmonisation method was implemented as a four-layer reproducible process, starting from raw data in the first layer. Then each of the layers two to four is framed by, but not limited to, the characterised challenges and lessons learnt. We achieved curated data as part of our second layer, followed by extracting phenotyped data in the third layer. We captured any project-specific requirements in the fourth layer., Results: Using the implemented four-layer harmonisation method, we retrieved approximately 100 health-related variables for the 3.2 million individuals in Wales, which are harmonised with corresponding variables for > 56 million individuals in England. We processed 13 data sources into the first layer of our harmonisation method: five of these are updated daily or weekly, and the rest at various frequencies providing sufficient data flow updates for frequent capturing of up-to-date demographic, administrative and clinical information., Conclusions: We implemented an efficient, transparent, scalable, and reproducible harmonisation method that enables multi-nation collaborative research. With a current focus on COVID-19 and its relationship with cardiovascular outcomes, the harmonised data has supported a wide range of research activities across the UK., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Vaccination programs against COVID-19 vary globally with estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) affected by vaccine type, schedule, strain, outcome, and recipient characteristics. This study assessed VE of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 vaccines against PCR positive SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospital admission, and death among adults aged 50 years and older in Wales, UK during the period 7 December 2020 to 18 July 2021, when Alpha, followed by Delta, were the predominant variants. We used individual-level linked routinely collected data within the Secure Anonymized Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. Data were available for 1,262,689 adults aged 50 years and over; coverage of one dose of any COVID-19 vaccine in this population was 92.6%, with coverage of two doses 90.4%. VE against PCR positive infection at 28-days or more post first dose of any COVID-19 vaccine was 16.0% (95%CI 9.6-22.0), and 42.0% (95%CI 36.5-47.1) seven or more days after a second dose. VE against hospital admission was higher at 72.9% (95%CI 63.6-79.8) 28 days or more post vaccination with one dose of any vaccine type, and 84.9% (95%CI 78.2-89.5) at 7 or more days post two doses. VE for one dose against death was estimated to be 80.9% (95%CI 72.1-86.9). VE against PCR positive infection and hospital admission was higher for BNT162b2 compared to ChAdOx1. In conclusion, vaccine uptake has been high among adults in Wales and VE estimates are encouraging, with two doses providing considerable protection against severe outcomes. Continued roll-out of the vaccination programme within Wales, and globally, is crucial in our fight against COVID-19.

There is a need for better understanding of the risk of thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic, thromboembolic disorders following first, second and booster vaccination doses and testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Self-controlled cases series analysis of 2.1 million linked patient records in Wales between 7th December 2020 and 31st December 2021. Outcomes were the first diagnosis of thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic and thromboembolic events in primary or secondary care datasets, exposure was defined as 0-28 days post-vaccination or a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2. 36,136 individuals experienced either a thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic or thromboembolic event during the study period. Relative to baseline, our observations show greater risk of outcomes in the periods post-first dose of BNT162b2 for haemorrhagic (IRR 1.47, 95%CI: 1.04-2.08) and idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (IRR 2.80, 95%CI: 1.21-6.49) events; post-second dose of ChAdOx1 for arterial thrombosis (IRR 1.14, 95%CI: 1.01-1.29); post-booster greater risk of venous thromboembolic (VTE) (IRR-Moderna 3.62, 95%CI: 0.99-13.17) (IRR-BNT162b2 1.39, 95%CI: 1.04-1.87) and arterial thrombosis (IRR-Moderna 3.14, 95%CI: 1.14-8.64) (IRR-BNT162b2 1.34, 95%CI: 1.15-1.58). Similarly, post SARS-CoV-2 infection the risk was increased for haemorrhagic (IRR 1.49, 95%CI: 1.15-1.92), VTE (IRR 5.63, 95%CI: 4.91, 6.4), arterial thrombosis (IRR 2.46, 95%CI: 2.22-2.71). We found that there was a measurable risk of thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic, thromboembolic events after COVID-19 vaccination and infection., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: In Wales, the Children in Need (CIN) dataset includes information relating to needs of children and social care support. Before the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 came into force in April 2016, this data collection was named the Children in Need census, changing to Children Receiving Care and Support (CRCS) after this date to reflect better the children eligible for inclusion. This paper describes these datasets, their potential for research and their limitations. We describe data that researchers can access via the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank and exploratory linkages made to health records., Methods: CIN and CRCS data were transferred to the SAIL Databank using a standardised approach to provide de-identified data with Anonymised Linking Fields (ALF) for successfully matched records. The linkage method relies on the use of Unique Pupil Numbers (UPN). As such, no records are currently available for children without a UPN, which includes most under age three. ALFs enabled linkage to individual-level health data within SAIL. Health service use was compared to non-CIN/CRCS populations., Results: CRCS data held within the SAIL Databank comprises 25,972 records, 81% of the total number of records reported by the Welsh Government. The CIN data contains 108,449 records, 79% of the Welsh Government's records for this data collection. Health service use of children in need, and children receiving care and support, was roughly equal to that of the non-CIN/CRCS population, except GP visits, where children in need had fewer consultations, and children receiving care and support had more consultations than the comparison population., Conclusion: Researchers can access Welsh CIN and CRCS datasets through the SAIL Databank, enabling research opportunities. Work is ongoing to improve records and to understand better the health and health service use among children captured by CIN and CRCS censuses., Competing Interests: Statement on conflicts of interest: None to declare.

Background: Several countries restricted the administration of ChAdOx1 to older age groups in 2021 over safety concerns following case reports and observed versus expected analyses suggesting a possible association with cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST). Large datasets are required to precisely estimate the association between Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and CVST due to the extreme rarity of this event. We aimed to accomplish this by combining national data from England, Scotland, and Wales., Methods and Findings: We created data platforms consisting of linked primary care, secondary care, mortality, and virological testing data in each of England, Scotland, and Wales, with a combined cohort of 11,637,157 people and 6,808,293 person years of follow-up. The cohort start date was December 8, 2020, and the end date was June 30, 2021. The outcome measure we examined was incident CVST events recorded in either primary or secondary care records. We carried out a self-controlled case series (SCCS) analysis of this outcome following first dose vaccination with ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2. The observation period consisted of an initial 90-day reference period, followed by a 2-week prerisk period directly prior to vaccination, and a 4-week risk period following vaccination. Counts of CVST cases from each country were tallied, then expanded into a full dataset with 1 row for each individual and observation time period. There was a combined total of 201 incident CVST events in the cohorts (29.5 per million person years). There were 81 CVST events in the observation period among those who a received first dose of ChAdOx1 (approximately 16.34 per million doses) and 40 for those who received a first dose of BNT162b2 (approximately 12.60 per million doses). We fitted conditional Poisson models to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs). Vaccination with ChAdOx1 was associated with an elevated risk of incident CVST events in the 28 days following vaccination, IRR = 1.93 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20 to 3.11). We did not find an association between BNT162b2 and CVST in the 28 days following vaccination, IRR = 0.78 (95% CI 0.34 to 1.77). Our study had some limitations. The SCCS study design implicitly controls for variables that are constant over the observation period, but also assumes that outcome events are independent of exposure. This assumption may not be satisfied in the case of CVST, firstly because it is a serious adverse event, and secondly because the vaccination programme in the United Kingdom prioritised the clinically extremely vulnerable and those with underlying health conditions, which may have caused a selection effect for individuals more prone to CVST. Although we pooled data from several large datasets, there was still a low number of events, which may have caused imprecision in our estimates., Conclusions: In this study, we observed a small elevated risk of CVST events following vaccination with ChAdOx1, but not BNT162b2. Our analysis pooled information from large datasets from England, Scotland, and Wales. This evidence may be useful in risk-benefit analyses of vaccine policies and in providing quantification of risks associated with vaccination to the general public., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests. AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group and the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats (NERVTAG) Risk Stratification Subgroup and AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 Thrombocytopenia Taskforce; all roles are remunerated to AS or his institution. AS and SS are members of the editorial board of PLOS Medicine. CRS declares funding from the MRC, NIHR, CSO and New Zealand Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment and Health Research Council during the conduct of this study. SVK is co-chair of the Scottish Government’s Expert Reference Group on COVID-19 and ethnicity, is a member of the Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (SAGE) subgroup on ethnicity and acknowledges funding from a NRS Senior Clinical Fellowship, MRC and CSO. CR is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group, SPI-M, MHRA Vaccine Benefit and Risk Working Group. HRS is an advisor to the Scottish Parliament’s COVID-19 Committee. RKO is a member of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Technology Appraisal Committee. DB is employed by Queen’s University Belfast, the Public Health Agency and the Department of Health (Northern Ireland). DB is a member of several Northern Ireland and UK government COVID-19 advisory boards, including the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling and the UK Vaccine Effectiveness Expert Panel, and has represented Northern Ireland on the UK Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies and its subgroups. SdeL through his University holds grants from AstraZeneca, Eli-Lilly, GSK, MSD, Sanofi and Seqirus. He has been advisory board members for Astra Zeneca, Sanofi and Seqirus. MW is a member of UK government COVID-19 advisory group, SPI-M, and a member of Scottish Government COVID-19 Advisory Group. All other authors report no conflicts of interest.

Background: While population estimates suggest high vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection, the protection for health care workers, who are at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure, is less understood., Methods: We conducted a national cohort study of health care workers in Wales (UK) from 7 December 2020 to 30 September 2021. We examined uptake of any COVID-19 vaccine, and the effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech) against polymerase chain reaction (PCR) confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We used linked and routinely collected national-scale data within the SAIL Databank. Data were available on 82,959 health care workers in Wales, with exposure extending to 26 weeks after second doses., Results: Overall vaccine uptake was high (90%), with most health care workers receiving theBNT162b2 vaccine (79%). Vaccine uptake differed by age, staff role, socioeconomic status; those aged 50-59 and 60+ years old were 1.6 times more likely to get vaccinated than those aged 16-29. Medical and dental staff, and Allied Health Practitioners were 1.5 and 1.1 times more likely to get vaccinated, compared to nursing and midwifery staff. The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine was found to be strong and consistent across the characteristics considered; 52% three to six weeks after first dose, 86% from two weeks after second dose, though this declined to 53% from 22 weeks after the second dose., Conclusions: With some variation in rate of uptake, those who were vaccinated had a reduced risk of PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to those unvaccinated. Second dose has provided stronger protection for longer than first dose but our study is consistent with waning from seven weeks onwards., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group,the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats (NERVTAG) Risk Stratification Subgroupand amember of AstraZeneca’s Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Task Force; all roles are unremunerated.CR is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group, the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling and the Medicines & Healthcare products RegulatoryAgency’s Vaccine Benefit and Risk Working Group.DTB is employed by the Public Health Agency, Northern Ireland, and the Department of Health, Northern Ireland.MP is employed by the Vaccine Preventable Disease Programme at Public Health Wales and is involved in the COVID-19 vaccine roll out for Wales.SVK is co-chair of the Scottish Government’s Expert Reference Group on COVID-19 andethnicity, is a member of the Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (SAGE) subgroup on ethnicity and acknowledges funding from a NRS Senior Clinical Fellowship, MRC and CSO.RF is a member of is a member of the Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (SAGE) Social Care Working Group (SCWG).RO is a member of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Technology Appraisal Committee (TAC) and has provided methodological advice outside of the submitted work toCogentiaHealthcare Consulting Ltd, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd,the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Decision Support Unit, the University of Bristol, and the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI).RAL is a member of the Welsh Government COVID19 Technical Advisory Group.All other authors have declared no competinginterests., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted existing health inequalities for ethnic minority groups and those living in more socioeconomically deprived areas in the UK. With higher levels of severe outcomes in these groups, equitable vaccination coverage should be prioritised. The aim of this study was to identify inequalities in coverage of COVID-19 vaccination in Wales, UK and to highlight areas which may benefit from routine enhanced surveillance and targeted interventions. Records within the Wales Immunisation System (WIS) population register were linked to the Welsh Demographic Service Dataset (WDSD) and central list of shielding patients, held within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. Ethnic group was derived from the 2011 census and over 20 administrative electronic health record (EHR) data sources. Uptake of first dose of any COVID-19 vaccine was analysed over time, with the odds of being vaccinated as at 25th April 2021 by sex, health board of residence, rural/urban classification, deprivation quintile and ethnic group presented. Using logistic regression models, analyses were adjusted for age group, care home resident status, health and social care worker status and shielding status. This study included 1,256,412 individuals aged 50 years and over. Vaccine coverage increased steadily from 8th December 2020 until mid-April 2021. Overall uptake of first dose of COVID-19 vaccine in this group was 92.1%. After adjustment the odds of being vaccinated were lower for individuals who were male, resident in the most deprived areas, resident in an urban area and an ethnic group other than White. The largest inequality was seen between ethnic groups, with the odds of being vaccinated 0.22 (95 %CI 0.21-0.24) if in any Black ethnic group compared to any White ethnic group. Ongoing monitoring of inequity in uptake of vaccinations is required, with better targeted interventions and engagement with deprived and ethnic communities to improve vaccination uptake., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: MP, AA, SC, RR, RL and LG sit on the Wales COVID-19 Vaccination Board (CVB) and/or subgroups of the CVB., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)