Search

Background Vaccine hesitancy is an emerging phenomenon in European countries and leads to decreasing trends in infant vaccine coverage. The aim of this study was to analyze the level of confidence and correct awareness about immunizations, which are crucial for the success of vaccination programmes. Methods As part of the NAVIDAD multicentre study, we examined vaccination confidence and complacency among a sample of 1820 pregnant women from 14 Italian cities. The questionnaire assessed the interviewee's knowledge, beliefs and misconceptions, as well as their socioeconomic status, information sources about vaccines and confidence in the Italian National Healthcare Service. Results Only 9% of women completely believed to the efficacy, necessity and safety of vaccinations. Almost 20% of them had misconceptions on most of the themes. There was a significant difference in the level of knowledge considering educational level: women with a high educational level have less probability of obtaining a low knowledge score (odds ratio (OR) 0.43 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34–0.54]). The level of knowledge was also influenced by the sources of information: women who received information from their general practitioner (GP) and from institutional websites had a significantly lower chance of having misconceptions (OR 0.74 [95% CI 0.58–0.96]; OR 0.59 [95% CI 0.46–0.74]). Finally, the results underlined the influence of trust in healthcare professional information on the likelihood of having misconceptions (OR 0.49 [95% CI 0.27–0.89]). Conclusions The data suggest the efficacy of GPs and institutional websites as a source of information to contrast misconceptions and underline the importance of confidence in the healthcare system to increase complacency and confidence in vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: An increasing number of individuals use online Artificial Intelligence (AI) - based chatbots to retrieve information on health-related topics. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy in answering vaccine-related answers of the currently most commonly used, advanced chatbots - ChatGPT-4.0 and Google Gemini Advanced., Methods: We compared the answers provided by the World Health Organization (WHO) to 38 open questions on vaccination myths and misconception, with the answers created by ChatGPT-4.0 and Gemini Advanced. Responses were considered as "appropriate", if the information provided was coherent and not in contrast to current WHO recommendations or to drug regulatory indications., Results and Conclusions: The rate of agreement between WHO answers and Chat-GPT-4.0 or Gemini Advanced was very high, as both provided 36 (94.7%) appropriate responses. The few discrepancies between WHO and AI-chatbots answers could not be considered "harmful", and both chatbots often invited the user to check reliable sources, such as CDC or the WHO websites, or to contact a local healthcare professional. In their current versions, both AI-chatbots may already be powerful instrument to support the traditional communication tools in primary prevention, with the potential to improve health literacy, medication adherence, and vaccine hesitancy and concerns. Given the rapid evolution of AI-based systems, further studies are strongly needed to monitor their accuracy and reliability over time.

Background: Contact tracing (CT) represented one of the core activities for the prevention and control of COVID-19 in the early phase of the pandemic. Several guidance documents were developed by international public health agencies and national authorities on the organization of COVID-19 CT activities. While most research on CT focused on the use digital tools or relied on modelling techniques to estimate the efficacy of interventions, poor evidence is available on the real-world implementation of CT strategies and on the organizational models adopted during the initial phase of the emergency to set up CT activities., Objective: We aimed to provide a comprehensive picture of the organizational aspects of CT activities during the first wave of the pandemic through the systematic identification and description of CT strategies used in different settings during the period from March to June 2020., Methods: A systematic review of published studies describing organizational models of COVID-19 CT strategies developed in real-world settings was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched. Studies not providing a description of the organizational aspects of CT strategies and studies reporting or modelling theoretical strategies or focusing on the description of digital technologies' properties were excluded. Quality of reporting was assessed by using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication Checklist for Population Health and Policy. We developed a narrative synthesis, using a conceptual framework to map the extracted studies broken down by target population., Results: We retrieved a total of 1638 studies, of which 17 were included in the narrative synthesis; 7 studies targeted the general population and 10 studies described CT activities carried out in specific population subgroups. Our review identified some common elements across studies used to develop CT activities, including decentralization of CT activities, involvement of trained nonpublic health resources (eg, university students or civil servants), use of informatics tools for CT management, interagency collaboration, and community engagement. CT strategies implemented in the workplace envisaged a strong collaboration with occupational health services. Outreach activities were shown to increase CT efficiency in susceptible groups, such as people experiencing homelessness. Data on the effectiveness of CT strategies are scarce, with only few studies reporting on key performance indicators., Conclusions: Despite the lack of systematically collected data on CT effectiveness, our findings can provide some indication for the future planning and development of CT strategies for infectious disease control, mainly in terms of coordination mechanisms and the use of human and technical resources needed for the rapid development of CT activities. Further research on the organizational models of CT strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic would be required to contribute to a more robust evidence-making process., (©Anna Maria Vincenza Amicosante, Annalisa Rosso, Fabio Bernardini, Elisa Guglielmi, Erica Eugeni, Filippo Da Re, Giovanni Baglio. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 23.06.2023.)

Objective: The Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases of Sapienza University of Rome conducted a critical appraisal of Regional Prevention Plans (RPPs) 2010-2012 aimed at exploring different quality elements of the RPPs, including the coherence with the epidemiological context and with regional health planning, the degree of attention to specific public health issues, the adherence to the principles of Project Cycle Management (PCM) and Evidence-Based Prevention (EBP), as well as at analyzing possible determinants of the quality of RPPs, such as the influence of Recovery Plans., Methods: A grid analysis evidence-based was use to conduct, for the two RPPs areas (i.e. strategic and operative planning): 1. the descriptive analysis of RPPs; 2. the analysis of the projects included in RPPs., Results: The analysis showed some strengths and weaknesses in the prevention planning process, including a low adherence to the principles of EBP and a low degree of attention towards the reduction of health inequalities. Furthermore, projects developed by Regions with recovery plans showed a lower quality., Conclusions: The role of the University in the ongoing evaluation of the planning process, but also in monitoring the health status of the population, with particular attention to regional differences, can be crucial to support regional capacity building in prevention planning.