Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.11.072 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.11.072 33334616!7831807!33334616     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 233.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 233.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 233.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 233.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Vaccine 2021 ; 39 (2): 309-316 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33334616|t=2021. Broad cross-national public support for accelerated COVID-19 vaccine trial designs |pdf=|usr=}}{{33334616}} gab.com Text Broad cross-national public support for accelerated COVID-19 vaccine trial designs JO: Vaccine http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33334616 #FOAvip A vaccine for COVID-19 is urgently needed. Several vaccine trial designs may significantly accelerate vaccine testing and approval, but also increase risks to human subjects. Concerns about whether the public would see such designs as ethical represent an important roadblock to their implementation; accordingly, both the World Health Organization and numerous scholars have called for consulting the public regarding them. We answered these calls by conducting a cross-national survey (n = 5920) in Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, New Zealand, South Africa, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The survey explained key differences between traditional vaccine trials and two accelerated designs: a challenge trial or a trial integrating a Phase II safety and immunogenicity trial into a larger Phase III efficacy trial. Respondents' answers to comprehension questions indicate that they largely understood the key differences and ethical trade-offs between the designs from our descriptions. We asked respondents whether they would prefer scientists to conduct traditional trials or one of these two accelerated designs. We found broad majorities prefer for scientists to conduct challenge trials (75%) and integrated trials (63%) over standard trials. Even as respondents acknowledged the risks, they perceived both accelerated trials as similarly ethical to standard trial designs. This high support is consistent across every geography and demographic subgroup we examined, including vulnerable populations. These findings may help assuage some of the concerns surrounding accelerated designs. Twit Text FOAVip Broad cross-national public support for accelerated COVID-19 vaccine trial designs ????Vaccine http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33334616 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33334616 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33334616}}</ref> Broad cross-national public support for accelerated COVID-19 vaccine trial designs #MMPMID33334616 Broockman D; Kalla J; Guerrero A; Budolfson M; Eyal N; Jewell NP; Magalhaes M; Sekhon JS Vaccine 2021[Jan]; 39 (2): 309-316 PMID33334616show ga A vaccine for COVID-19 is urgently needed. Several vaccine trial designs may significantly accelerate vaccine testing and approval, but also increase risks to human subjects. Concerns about whether the public would see such designs as ethical represent an important roadblock to their implementation; accordingly, both the World Health Organization and numerous scholars have called for consulting the public regarding them. We answered these calls by conducting a cross-national survey (n = 5920) in Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, New Zealand, South Africa, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The survey explained key differences between traditional vaccine trials and two accelerated designs: a challenge trial or a trial integrating a Phase II safety and immunogenicity trial into a larger Phase III efficacy trial. Respondents' answers to comprehension questions indicate that they largely understood the key differences and ethical trade-offs between the designs from our descriptions. We asked respondents whether they would prefer scientists to conduct traditional trials or one of these two accelerated designs. We found broad majorities prefer for scientists to conduct challenge trials (75%) and integrated trials (63%) over standard trials. Even as respondents acknowledged the risks, they perceived both accelerated trials as similarly ethical to standard trial designs. This high support is consistent across every geography and demographic subgroup we examined, including vulnerable populations. These findings may help assuage some of the concerns surrounding accelerated designs. |*Decision Making[MESH] |*Research Design[MESH] |Asia/epidemiology[MESH] |Australia/epidemiology[MESH] |COVID-19 Vaccines/*administration & dosage/biosynthesis/supply & distribution[MESH] |COVID-19/epidemiology/*prevention & control/psychology/virology[MESH] |Choice Behavior[MESH] |Clinical Trials as Topic[MESH] |Female[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Immunity, Innate/drug effects[MESH] |Immunization Schedule[MESH] |Immunogenicity, Vaccine[MESH] |Male[MESH] |North America/epidemiology[MESH] |Pandemics/*prevention & control[MESH] |Patient Safety[MESH] |Public Health[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2/*immunology/pathogenicity[MESH] |Surveys and Questionnaires[MESH] |Time Factors[MESH] |United Kingdom/epidemiology[MESH]Broad cross-national public support for accelerated COVID-19 vaccine t(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing