Search results

Despite significant progress in Iran's immunization programs, vaccine policymaking in the country still faces various challenges and shortcomings. To address these issues and ensure sustained progress toward achieving comprehensive vaccination policies, it is essential to identify the critical factors influencing vaccine policies in Iran. Our study aims to provide evidence-based insights that can inform the development of effective and equitable vaccine strategies, leading to a more sustainable and efficient approach to vaccination in the country.

This mixed-method study aimed to analyze the factors influencing the future of human vaccine policy using Cross Impact Analysis. Firstly, a scoping review was conducted to identify the factors affecting the future of human vaccine development. Secondly, a semi-structured interview was conducted with experts in this field to add more factors and confirm the identified factors within the Iranian context. Finally, a Cross-Impact Analysis (CIA) approach was applied to comprehend the complex relationships between the identified factors. Thematic analysis was used for the qualitative data, and MICMAC analysis was applied to characterize the relationships between the factors.

Seventeen key driving force factors were identified through comprehensive review and interviews. These factors were assigned weighted values ranging from zero to three and subsequently analyzed using MICMAC software. Employing the Cross-Impact Analysis (CIA) technique, the study characterized the impact of each factor on vaccine policy and elucidated the intricate interactions between them. The findings underscored that robust leadership and governance, an innovative ecosystem, and well-established immunization information systems emerged as pivotal driving forces shaping vaccine policy in Iran.

While this study contributes valuable insights into the driving factors influencing vaccine policy in Iran, it is important to acknowledge several limitations. The results rely on the subjective perceptions of a diverse group of specialists, and future research could delve into additional factors in other countries to identify common themes and differences.

This study provides evidence to assist policymakers in making informed decisions regarding vaccines in Iran. The findings suggest that enhancing access to vaccines, fostering trust in the healthcare system, and prioritizing equity in distribution can contribute to increased vaccination rates and a reduction in vaccine-preventable diseases.

This study provides a unique contribution to the field of vaccine policy by utilizing the cross-impact analysis to examine the complex interactions among various factors. The results of this analysis demonstrate that these interactions can significantly impact the overall system, highlighting the need for policymakers to consider multiple factors when formulating effective strategies. By revealing the significance of these interactions, this research offers valuable insights into the development of successful policies that can shape a desirable future for vaccine policy in Iran. Future studies could ratify the findings from this research by applying other methodological approaches.

This study aims to analyse the structure of the Indian vaccine supply chain (SC) during the Covid-19 crisis and explore the underlying challenges at each stage in the network. It also brings out the difference in performance of various constituent states.

This study relied on both primary and secondary data for the analyses. For the primary data, the study gathered experts’ opinions to validate the authors’ inferences. For the secondary data, it relies on government data provided in websites.

Based on the quartile analysis and cluster analysis of the secondary data, the authors find that the constituent states responded differently during the first and second waves. This was due to the differences in SC characteristics attributed to varied demographics and administrative efficiency.

This paper’s analyses is primarily limited to secondary information and inferences are based on them. The study has important implications for implementing the large-scale vaccination drives by government and constituent states for better coordination and last-mile delivery.

The contribution is unique in studying the performance of constituent states using statistical techniques, with secondary data from authentic sources. It is also unique in combining this observation with validation from experts.

This study aims to understand the utility of personas and illustrate, through a case study, how a persona-building exercise in a Community Based Prevention Marketing (CBPM) training of community leaders elicited important insights that complemented findings from ongoing formative research on vaccine hesitancy in the Hispanic/Latino population in the USA during COVID-19 pandemic.

An exploratory concurrent parallel qualitative study design compared three personas created by community-based organization members (n = 37) to transcripts from five formative research focus groups (n = 30) from the same project. All participants in this study were recruited by the National COVID-19 Resiliency Network as part of their capacity-building and formative research activities. Grounded theory guided the content analysis.

This study found personas and focus groups to be complementary. A high degree of co-occurrence was observed when investigating the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine under the categories of barriers, culture and communication. Between the two methods, the authors found strong associations between fear, disruption to the value system, work-related barriers, inaccessibility to health care and information sources and misinformation. Areas of divergence were negligible.

While personas provided background information about the population and sharing “how” to reach the priority population, focus groups provided the “why” behind the behavior, followed by “how”.

A community-driven persona-building process built on cultural community knowledge and existing data can build community capacity, provide rich information to assist in the creation of tailored messages, strategies and overall interventions during a public health crisis and provide user-centered, evidence-based information about a priority population while researchers and practitioners wait on the results from formative research.

This case study provided a unique opportunity to analyze the complementary effectiveness of two methods acting in tandem to understand the priority population: stakeholder-informed persona-building and participant-informed focus group interviews. Understanding their complementary nature addresses a time gap that often exists between researchers and practitioners during times of crises and builds on recommendations associated with bringing rigor into practice, promoting academic contribution to real-world issues and building collaborative partnerships. Finally, it supports the utility of a nimble tool that improves social marketers’ ability to know more about their audience for intervention design when time is of the essence and formative research is ongoing.

Disinformation on social media is a serious issue. This study examines the effects of disinformation on COVID-19 vaccination decision-making to understand how social media users make healthcare decisions when disinformation is presented in their social media feeds. It examines trust in post owners as a moderator on the relationship between information types (i.e. disinformation and factual information) and vaccination decision-making.

This study conducts a scenario-based web survey experiment to collect extensive survey data from social media users.

This study reveals that information types differently affect social media users' COVID-19 vaccination decision-making and finds a moderating effect of trust in post owners on the relationship between information types and vaccination decision-making. For those who have a high degree of trust in post owners, the effect of information types on vaccination decision-making becomes large. In contrast, information types do not affect the decision-making of those who have a very low degree of trust in post owners. Besides, identification and compliance are found to affect trust in post owners.

This study contributes to the literature on online disinformation and individual healthcare decision-making by demonstrating the effect of disinformation on vaccination decision-making and providing empirical evidence on how trust in post owners impacts the effects of information types on vaccination decision-making. This study focuses on trust in post owners, unlike prior studies that focus on trust in information or social media platforms.

This study aims to investigate how message sidedness affects the impact of fake news posted on social media on consumers' emotional responses.

The study involves a face-tracking experiment in which 198 participants were exposed to different fake news messages concerning the COVID-19 vaccine. Specifically, participants were exposed to fake news using (1) a one-sided negative fake news message in which the message was entirely unfavorable and (2) a two-sided fake news message in which the negative message was mixed with favorable information. Noldus FaceReader 7, an automatic facial expression recognition system, was used to recognize participants' emotions as they read fake news. The authors sampled 17,450 observations of participants' emotional responses.

The results provide evidence of the significant influence of message sidedness on consumers' emotional valence and arousal. Specifically, two-sided fake news positively influences emotional valence, while one-sided fake news positively influences emotional arousal.

The current study demonstrates that research on fake news posted on social media may particularly benefit from insights regarding the potential but often overlooked importance of strategic design choices in fake news messages and their impact on consumers' emotional responses.

The COVID-19 pandemic is not a foodborne infectious disease, but it has dramatically impacted food safety practices worldwide due to its potential for transmission through contaminated surfaces and food. Accordingly, the Omicron variant seems to have affected food-related activities and behaviours and disturbed food supply networks since its appearance in November 2021. Hence, this paper aims to assess how the Omicron variant impacted food safety knowledge, attitudes and practices amongst adult consumers in five countries: Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Serbia, Montenegro and Russia.

The study is based on an online survey. The questionnaire was developed and revised based on previous research on the impact of previous COVID-19 waves on food-related activities in several countries. The questionnaire was distributed through the SurveyMonkey platform from January 15 to February 25, 2022. It consisted of 29 multiple-choice and one-option questions organised into three sections. A total of 6,483 valid responses were received. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25.0 was used to analyse the survey results.

According to the survey findings, food safety practices evolved during the Omicron wave in the studied countries. Firstly, less than half of the sample used a face mask whilst purchasing food. Secondly, regarding food safety knowledge, the survey results suggest that there is still a lack of knowledge in the studied countries. Thirdly, the survey indicates a lack of knowledge amongst the respondents regarding food safety attitudes. For instance, more than a third of the sample (34.4%) are unsure whether the COVID-19 virus can be transmitted through food. These results are surprising and alarming, especially considering that our sample has a higher education than the population of the studied countries.

The main limitation of this research is the sample bias. Survey participants were randomly chosen, enrolled voluntarily and not rewarded. As a result, the questionnaire was self-administered and completed exclusively by people motivated by an interest in the topic. Consequently, our survey does not represent the general population of the studied countries. People with a high degree of education and women, for example, were overrepresented in our sample.

This study is unique in that it is the first to gather information and analyse people’s perceptions of the effects of the Omicron variant on food safety. As a result, the findings of this survey offer a solid basis for future investigations into the impact of the pandemic on food safety in the Balkan region and Russia. This study can help further understand the changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. It provides crucial insights that can be used to guide future decision-making and policy development regarding improving food safety practices. This and other future studies will be a foundation for organisational and government readiness for future shocks, crises and pandemics. The effects of the present Ukrainian conflict on agricultural systems and supply chains throughout the globe (e.g. increased food prices) show that this is timely, urgent and highly required.

This study aims to deepen the understanding of the challenges and implications entailed by deploying mobile clinics in conflict zones to reach populations affected by violence and cut off from health-care services.

This research combines an integrated literature review and an instrumental case study. The literature review comprises two targeted reviews to provide insights: one on conflict zones and one on mobile clinics. The case study describes the process and challenges faced throughout a mobile clinic deployment during and after the Iraq War. The data was gathered using mixed methods over a two-year period (2017–2018).

Armed conflicts directly impact the populations’ health and access to health care. Mobile clinic deployments are often used and recommended to provide health-care access to vulnerable populations cut off from health-care services. However, there is a dearth of peer-reviewed literature documenting decision support tools for mobile clinic deployments.

This study highlights the gaps in the literature and provides direction for future research to support the development of valuable insights and decision support tools for practitioners.

During the supply chain disruptions caused by COVID-19, logistics service providers (LSPs) have invested heavily in innovations to enhance their supply chain resilience capabilities. However, only little attention has been given so far to the nature of these innovative capabilities, in particular to what extent LSPs were able to repurpose capabilities to build supply chain resilience. In response, using the concept of exaptation, this study identifies to what extent LSPs have discovered and utilized latent functions to build supply chain resilience capabilities during a disruptive event of high impact and low probability.

This conceptual paper uses a theory building approach to advance the literature on supply chain resilience by delineating the relationship between exaptation and supply chain resilience capabilities in the context of COVID-19. To do so, we propose two frameworks: (1) to clarify the role of exaptation for supply chain resilience capabilities and (2) to depict four different exaptation dimensions for the supply chain resilience capabilities of LSPs.

We illustrate how LSPs have repurposed original functions into new products or services to build their supply chain resilience capabilities and combine the two critical concepts of exploitation and exploration capabilities to identify four exaptation dimensions in the context of LSPs, namely impeded exaptation, configurative exaptation, transformative exaptation and ambidextrous exaptation.

As one of the first studies linking exaptation and supply chain resilience, the framework and subsequent categorization advance the understanding of how LSPs can build exapt-driven supply chain resilience capabilities and synthesize the current literature to offer conceptual clarity regarding the varied implications and outcomes linked to the repurposing of capabilities.

This survey explores the application of real options theory to the field of health economics. The integration of options theory offers a valuable framework to address these challenges, providing insights into healthcare investments, policy analysis and patient care pathways.

This research employs the real options theory, a financial concept, to delve into health economics challenges. Through a systematic approach, three distinct models rooted in this theory are crafted and analyzed. Firstly, the study examines the value of investing in emerging health technology, factoring in future advantages, associated costs and unpredictability. The second model is patient-centric, evaluating the choice between immediate treatment switch and waiting for more clarity, while also weighing the associated risks. Lastly, the research assesses pandemic-related government policies, emphasizing the importance of delaying decisions in the face of uncertainties, thereby promoting data-driven policymaking.

Three different real options models are presented in this study to illustrate their applicability and value in aiding decision-makers. (1) The first evaluates investments in new technology, analyzing future benefits, discount rates and benefit volatility to determine investment value. (2) In the second model, a patient has the option of switching treatments now or waiting for more information before optimally switching treatments. However, waiting has its risks, such as disease progression. By modeling the potential benefits and risks of both options, and factoring in the time value, this model aids doctors and patients in making informed decisions based on a quantified assessment of potential outcomes. (3) The third model concerns pandemic policy: governments can end or prolong lockdowns. While awaiting more data on the virus might lead to economic and societal strain, the model emphasizes the economic value of deferring decisions under uncertainty.

This research provides a quantified perspective on various decisions in healthcare, from investments in new technology to treatment choices for patients to government decisions regarding pandemics. By applying real options theory, stakeholders can make more evidence-driven decisions.

Decisions about patient care pathways and pandemic policies have direct societal implications. For instance, choices regarding the prolongation or ending of lockdowns can lead to economic and societal strain.

The originality of this study lies in its application of real options theory, a concept from finance, to the realm of health economics, offering novel insights and analytical tools for decision-makers in the healthcare sector.