IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0259700.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the United States COVID-19 vaccine allocation strategy

Author

Listed:
  • Md Rafiul Islam
  • Tamer Oraby
  • Audrey McCombs
  • Mohammad Mihrab Chowdhury
  • Mohammad Al-Mamun
  • Michael G Tyshenko
  • Claus Kadelka

Abstract

Background: Anticipating an initial shortage of vaccines for COVID-19, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in the United States developed priority vaccine allocations for specific demographic groups in the population. This study evaluates the performance of the CDC vaccine allocation strategy with respect to multiple potentially competing vaccination goals (minimizing mortality, cases, infections, and years of life lost (YLL)), under the same framework as the CDC allocation: four priority vaccination groups and population demographics stratified by age, comorbidities, occupation and living condition (congested or non-congested). Methods and findings: We developed a compartmental disease model that incorporates key elements of the current pandemic including age-varying susceptibility to infection, age-varying clinical fraction, an active case-count dependent social distancing level, and time-varying infectivity (accounting for the emergence of more infectious virus strains). The CDC allocation strategy is compared to all other possibly optimal allocations that stagger vaccine roll-out in up to four phases (17.5 million strategies). The CDC allocation strategy performed well in all vaccination goals but never optimally. Under the developed model, the CDC allocation deviated from the optimal allocations by small amounts, with 0.19% more deaths, 4.0% more cases, 4.07% more infections, and 0.97% higher YLL, than the respective optimal strategies. The CDC decision to not prioritize the vaccination of individuals under the age of 16 was optimal, as was the prioritization of health-care workers and other essential workers over non-essential workers. Finally, a higher prioritization of individuals with comorbidities in all age groups improved outcomes compared to the CDC allocation. Conclusion: The developed approach can be used to inform the design of future vaccine allocation strategies in the United States, or adapted for use by other countries seeking to optimize the effectiveness of their vaccine allocation strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Md Rafiul Islam & Tamer Oraby & Audrey McCombs & Mohammad Mihrab Chowdhury & Mohammad Al-Mamun & Michael G Tyshenko & Claus Kadelka, 2021. "Evaluation of the United States COVID-19 vaccine allocation strategy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-22, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0259700
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259700
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0259700
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0259700&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0259700?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. González-Parra, Gilberto & Villanueva-Oller, Javier & Navarro-González, F.J. & Ceberio, Josu & Luebben, Giulia, 2024. "A network-based model to assess vaccination strategies for the COVID-19 pandemic by using Bayesian optimization," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0259700. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.