A Novel Vaccine Selection Decision-Making Model (VSDMM) for COVID-19

Abdelwahab, Sayed F.; Issa, Usama H.

doi:10.3390/vaccines9070718

Cited by 20 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(50 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In early stages of vaccination campaigns, such as the one during the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccines are hard to evaluate. Competing expert rankings of vaccine technologies, country of origin, effectiveness, side effects, approval status by national and international authorities can yield very diverse recommendations 43 . Consequently, individual hesitancy can vary by vaccine types.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding hesitancy with revealed preferences across COVID-19 vaccine types

Kutasi

Koltai

Szabó‐Morvai

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many countries have secured larger quantities of COVID-19 vaccines than their population is willing to take. The abundance and the large variety of vaccines created not only an unprecedented intensity of vaccine related public discourse, but also a historical moment to understand vaccine hesitancy better. Yet, the heterogeneity of hesitancy by vaccine types has been neglected in the existing literature so far. We address this problem by analysing the acceptance and the assessment of five vaccine types. We use information collected with a nationally representative survey at the end of the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Hungary. During the vaccination campaign, individuals could reject the assigned vaccine to wait for a more preferred alternative that enables us to quantify revealed preferences across vaccine types. We find that hesitancy is heterogenous by vaccine types and is driven by individuals’ trusted source of information. Believers of conspiracy theories are more likely to evaluate the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) unacceptable. Those who follow the advice of politicians are more likely to evaluate vector-based (AstraZeneca and Sputnik) or whole-virus vaccines (Sinopharm) acceptable. We argue that the greater selection of available vaccine types and the free choice of the individual are desirable conditions to increase the vaccination rate in societies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding hesitancy with revealed preferences across COVID-19 vaccine types

Kutasi

Koltai

Szabó‐Morvai

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, our research acknowledges a substantial gap in the use of MCDM to select COVID-19 vaccines, as noted by Abdelwahab et al (2021), despite the fact that Hezam et al (2021) highlighting the importance of vaccine classification uses a neutrosophic analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and TOPSIS method to rank COVID-19 vaccine alternatives based on priority groups. Consequently, much of the existing literature focuses on the vaccine distribution process (Jakhar et al, 2021) instead of considering optimal vaccination approaches (Moore et al, 2021).…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

A hybrid approach based on ELECTRE III‐genetic algorithm and TOPSIS method for selection of optimal COVID‐19 vaccines

Forestal

2021

Multi Criteria Decision Anal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

COVID‐19 pandemic poses unprecedented challenges to the world health system, prompting academics and health professionals to develop appropriate solutions. Researchers reported different COVID‐19 vaccines introduced by institutions and companies around the globe, which are at different stages of development. However, research developing an integrated framework for selecting and ranking the optimal potential vaccine against COVID‐19 is minimal. This paper aimed to fill this gap by using a hybrid methodology based on ELimination Et Choice Translating REality III (ELECTRE III)–Genetic Algorithm (GA) and Technique of Order Preference Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) approach to select the optimal SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine. ELECTRE III method yields a fathomable analysis of the concordance index, while GA is known for its ability to disaggregate decision‐making preferences from holistic decisions. TOPSIS is preferred for picking an ideal and an anti‐ideal solution. Thus, combining ELECTRE III‐GA and TOPSIS is considered the best model to assess vaccines against the pandemic. The results confirm that the best vaccines rely on a high level of safety, efficacy, and availability. Our developed evaluation framework can help healthcare professionals and researchers gain research information and make critical decisions regarding potential vaccines against the disease.

show abstract

“…Therefore, TB vaccines do not benefit from vaccine selection models such as those developed for COVID-19. 4 The M. tuberculosis infectious cycle usually starts when a few bacilli are inhaled by a susceptible host and, once in the lung, are phagocytosed by alveolar macrophages. The tubercle bacillus has evolved several mechanisms to avoid the cytotoxic arsenal of macrophages, whereby the induction of phagosomal membrane rupture is thought to allow translocation from the harsh phagolysosome environment to the gentler cytosol.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%