Abstract
COVID-19 mortality increases dramatically with age and is also substantially higher among Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) populations in the United States. These two facts introduce tradeoffs because BIPOC populations are younger than white populations. In analyses of California and Minnesota--demographically divergent states--we show that COVID vaccination schedules based solely on age benefit the older white populations at the expense of younger BIPOC populations with higher risk of death from COVID-19. We find that strategies that prioritize high-risk geographic areas for vaccination at all ages better target mortality risk than age-based strategies alone, although they do not always perform as well as direct prioritization of high-risk racial/ethnic groups.
One-sentence summary Age-based COVID-19 vaccination prioritizes white people above higher-risk others; geographic prioritization improves equity.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work is supported in part by the National Institutes of Health. ARR and MB are supported by the National Institute on Aging (ARR: T32AG049663; MB: P30AG012839). EWF, DVR, and JPL are supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (P2CHD041023). MVK is supported in part by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (K99DA051534). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. In addition, EWF is supported by a Sustainable Development Goals Rapid Response Grant, a College of Liberal Arts Seed Grant, and during initial data processing stages was supported by the Fesler-Lampert Chair of Aging Studies at the University of Minnesota. The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report.
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:
This study was deemed exempt from full review by the University of Minnesota institutional review board (STUDY00012527) and was approved by the California Health and Human Services institutional review board (Project number: 2020-109).
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
In accordance with our data use agreement, individual-level data are not publicly available. When possible, we will provide aggregated data upon request and in accordance with our data use agreements.
