View clinical trials related to Influenza, Human.
Filter by:Influenza virus has high morbidity rates during annual epidemics, with certain high-risk groups being particularly susceptible to complications and mortality. Vaccination is the main prevention measure, alongside with hygiene measures. Nevertheless, vaccine coverage remains low. Some studies suggest that short, standardized interventions can improve coverage of several vaccines. Hypothesis: Brief Intervention is an effective tool in improving vaccination coverage in people who have initially rejected it. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of a Brief Intervention in increasing influenza vaccination (IIV) coverage compared with the usual advice in people who refuse it. Method: cluster randomized clinical trial. The study population was individuals with high risk factors who initially refused the influenza vaccine. Professionals participants (doctors and nurses) were assigned randomly to the intervention group (brief intervention) and the control group (usual advice).
The proposed study is designed to investigate if and how pregnant women infected with Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) infection go on to develop long-term immunity. In December 2019, a group of people in Wuhan, China presented with symptoms of a pneumonia of an unknown cause that led to the discovery of a new coronavirus called COVID-19. COVID-19 has caused a global pandemic with 7,140,000 confirmed cases and 418,000 deaths as of 13th June 2020. In the United Kingdom (UK), there have been 294,000 cases and 41,662 deaths as of 13th June 2020. In humans, this infection primarily involves the upper part of the lungs, but it can also affect other organs. It causes mild symptoms in the majority of people affected but some people can have severe infections, with some even requiring critical care in hospital. During Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), a previous coronavirus epidemic, pregnant women were disproportionately affected with severe illness. Understanding how the immune system responds long-term to this infection may hold the key to developing better vaccines and efficient treatment plans. Specialised immunity develops when individuals are infected by this and other viruses. The investigators of this study propose that, in pregnancy, this specialised immunity may not behave effectively. This may affect their ability to develop long lasting immunity and make them more vulnerable to re-infection. In this study, the investigators aim to recruit patients across 6 groups including COVID-19 newly infected pregnant women, and people with differing illness severity, mild to moderate, severe/critical, no infection (controls), as well as pregnant women with influenza and those receiving influenza vaccine. The study team will compare COVID-19 in pregnancy with non-pregnant infected and with influenza infected and vaccinated pregnant women. The study team will consent patients in all of these groups to provide a series of blood samples at different time points in a 12-month period.
This research aims to identify which behavioral science strategies are most effective at increasing flu vaccination rates overall and based on patients' individual characteristics. Past behavioral science interventions have shown promise in increasing flu vaccinations. For example, successful interventions have encouraged people to make concrete plans for when they will get a flu vaccination (Milkman et al. 2011), sent automated calls or text messages reminding patients to get a flu vaccination (Cutrona et al. 2018; Regan et al. 2017), or provided financial incentives for getting vaccinated (Nowalk et al. 2010). Although these results are promising, these studies have been conducted in isolation on different populations, which makes it difficult to compare their interventions' effectiveness or to have enough power to reliably detect differing responses to interventions based on individual characteristics. This research will simultaneously test 19 different SMS interventions to increase flu vaccinations in a "mega-study" and apply machine learning to identify which interventions work best for whom. The interventions are designed by behavioral science experts from the Behavior Change for Good Initiative (BCFG), Penn Medicine Nudge Unit (PMNU), and Geisinger Behavioral Insights Team (BIT). We expect to include at least 80,000 participants. The specific aims of this research are to identify (1) which behavioral science strategies effectively increase flu vaccination rates overall, and (2) which strategies are most effective for different subgroups (e.g., based on age, gender, race).
Subjects will be recruited and divided into 3 groups: 1. Experimental Group (408 subjects): combined immunization of PPV23 and IIV4; 2. Control Group A (408 subjects): IIV4 only; 3. Control Group B (408 subjects): PPV23 only; All blood samples will be collected before and one month after vaccinatioin. The immunogenicity and safety of both experimental and control groups will be compared and the data be analyzed.
Primary Objective: To provide serum samples (collected from participants before vaccination [Blood Sample 1] and after final vaccination [Blood Sample 2]) to Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) for further analysis by the World Health Organization (WHO), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to support formulation recommendations for subsequent influenza vaccines. In addition, serum samples from adult participants may be further analyzed by the Sponsor to assess breadth of immune response induced by the study vaccines.
The study is aim to evaluate the Immunogenicity with two groups of participants who will received a seasonal trivalent split, inactivated influenza vaccine (A/H1N1; A/H3N2 and B) or an active comparator (licensed influenza vaccine).
As part of the fight against COVID-19, the UK government has announced its most comprehensive flu campaign to date (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/most-comprehensive-flu-programme-in-uk-history-will-be-ro lled-out-this-winter). This should not be surpising: every year NHS hospitals experience an overwhelming number of influenza cases, and COVID-19 increases this concern. As in previous years, the flu vaccine is free at the point of care for people 65 and over. New this year is that later in the season the vaccine will be made available free at the point of care for people 50 and over. However, if people refuse to take the vaccine this comprehensive program cannot benefit public health. The degree to which vaccine hesitancy is expressed varies across characteristics of the vaccine considered and the time and place it is offered, and across characteristics of the person's perceptions of complacency, convenience, confidence, calculations, and communal responsibility, i.e. the "5Cs". Information campaigns can be used to influence all 5Cs, and public facing information is often a necessary component of public health campaigns that may also include structural components. Largely, information campaigns can be viewed as a type of educational intervention. Educational interventions may fall short of what is needed to alter people's intentions to vaccinate where they focus on system 1 rational thinking processes and neglect system 2 automatic thinking processes. To be more effective, public health messages must be tailored to align with the "beliefs, attitudes, and motivations" of the very people they intend to influence. Fact-led educational interventions to increase parents' intentions to vaccinate their children are particularly ineffective where more subtle content opposes the recipient's deep-seated values. In a different context, recycling behaviour, previous research demonstrated that messages aligned with people's deep-seated values (i.e. the moral foundations that underlie political ideologies) are more likely to promote desired behavioural intentions than unaligned messages. The present research expands the scope of previous research in two ways. First, rather than investigating parental attitudes towards vaccination, the investigators will look at people's intentions to self-vaccinate. Second, the investigators will explore the effectiveness of messages aligned with the moral foundations that underlie individual's political ideologies on their intentions to be vaccinated.
The primary objective of the study is to compare the clinical efficacy of high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV-HD) to standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV-SD) in participants 6 months through 35 months of age for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza illness caused by any influenza A or B type. The secondary objectives of the study are: - To compare QIV-HD to QIV-SD: - in participants 6 months through 35 months of age for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza illness caused by any influenza A or B type using a more stringent threshold - in participants 6 months through 35 months of age for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed protocol-defined influenza-like illness caused by viral strains similar to those contained in the vaccine. - in participants 6 months through 23 months of age for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza illness caused by any influenza A or B types. - To compare hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) immune response of QIV-HD to QIV-SD in participants 6 months through 35 months of age - To describe the HAI, seroneutralization (SN), and anti-neuraminidase (NA) immune response - To describe the immune response to revaccination in Season 3 (Northern Hemisphere) - To describe the safety profile of each vaccine
Primary Objective: Immunogenicity: To describe the immune response induced by high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV-HD) and AdimFlu-S (QIS) by hemagglutinin inhibition (HAI) measurement method in all participants. Safety: To describe the safety profile of all participants in each study groups.
This trial is taking place in Los Angeles, CA among patients from primary care practices within the UCLA Health System. The study design is a 2x2x2 factorial design, nested in a parallel 2-arm trial. The parallel arms are control v. reminder letter (reminder messages sent via the patient portal, reminding participants of an overdue influenza vaccine) Nested within the reminder letter arm, we will have 3 additional components: - A direct scheduling link within the reminder letter enabling the patient to schedule an influenza vaccine only visit (direct scheduling link vs. no direct scheduling link). - A pre-commitment prompt (pre-commitment prompt vs. no prompt) asking about a patient's intention to get the influenza vaccination - A pre-appointment reminder, encouraging patients to ask for their influenza vaccine at their upcoming appointment (pre-appointment reminder encouraging influenza vaccination vs. standard pre-appointment reminder not mentioning influenza vaccination)