Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

A rapid review of COVID-19 vaccine prioritization in the U.S.: alignment between Federal guidance and State practice

View ORCID ProfileVageesh Jain, Lara Schwarz, Paula Lorgelly
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.11.21253411
Vageesh Jain
1Institute for Global Health, University College London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Vageesh Jain
  • For correspondence: Vageesh.jain@ucl.ac.uk
Lara Schwarz
2Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paula Lorgelly
3Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Population groups to be prioritized for COVID-19 vaccinations in the U.S. have been determined at the Federal level. Evidence suggests that there is variation in how States have implemented this guidance. This review examines how the position of population groups in vaccine priority lists varies between Federal guidance and State practice.

Methods An online search of State vaccination prioritization plans was conducted. Data were extracted on each population group included and their relative position. A standardized ranking method was applied to provide a directional measure of variability in prioritization between State and Federal guidance, for each population group.

Results Healthcare workers and those in long-term care facilities were largely prioritized in line with Federal guidance. Aside from early education staff, essential workers were often excluded at State level. Of the 37 States including frontline essential workers, 12 assigned them to a lower priority than recommended. Almost all States included the 65-74 year age group and most assigned them to a higher position than recommended in Federal guidance. Those with underlying medical conditions were similarly highly prioritized, although there was more variability across States. Some socially vulnerable groups (not included in Federal guidance) were highly prioritized by many States.

Conclusions Across the U.S, the prioritization of groups for COVID-19 vaccination has been highly variable. Essential workers were the most often excluded or less highly prioritised group compared to Federal guidance. Some socially vulnerable groups were highly prioritized in State plans, whilst others were mentioned in only a few States. Future guidance must be relevant to local needs and values, to minimise any unwarranted heterogeneity in vaccine access across populations.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

No funding required

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

N/A

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

Data available upon request after peer-review and publication

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted March 12, 2021.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A rapid review of COVID-19 vaccine prioritization in the U.S.: alignment between Federal guidance and State practice
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
A rapid review of COVID-19 vaccine prioritization in the U.S.: alignment between Federal guidance and State practice
Vageesh Jain, Lara Schwarz, Paula Lorgelly
medRxiv 2021.03.11.21253411; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.11.21253411
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
A rapid review of COVID-19 vaccine prioritization in the U.S.: alignment between Federal guidance and State practice
Vageesh Jain, Lara Schwarz, Paula Lorgelly
medRxiv 2021.03.11.21253411; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.11.21253411

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Health Policy
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (230)
  • Allergy and Immunology (507)
  • Anesthesia (111)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1264)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (207)
  • Dermatology (148)
  • Emergency Medicine (283)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (538)
  • Epidemiology (10056)
  • Forensic Medicine (5)
  • Gastroenterology (502)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2486)
  • Geriatric Medicine (240)
  • Health Economics (482)
  • Health Informatics (1653)
  • Health Policy (757)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (638)
  • Hematology (250)
  • HIV/AIDS (538)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (11896)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (627)
  • Medical Education (255)
  • Medical Ethics (75)
  • Nephrology (269)
  • Neurology (2304)
  • Nursing (140)
  • Nutrition (354)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (458)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (537)
  • Oncology (1259)
  • Ophthalmology (377)
  • Orthopedics (134)
  • Otolaryngology (226)
  • Pain Medicine (158)
  • Palliative Medicine (50)
  • Pathology (326)
  • Pediatrics (737)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (315)
  • Primary Care Research (282)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2295)
  • Public and Global Health (4850)
  • Radiology and Imaging (846)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (493)
  • Respiratory Medicine (657)
  • Rheumatology (289)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (241)
  • Sports Medicine (228)
  • Surgery (273)
  • Toxicology (44)
  • Transplantation (131)
  • Urology (100)