ORCID Profile
0000-0003-0189-3739
Current Organisation
University of Adelaide
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 04-2020
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2020
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 08-10-2021
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 12-2022
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2020
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 08-2023
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 28-03-2019
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 29-05-2023
DOI: 10.5694/MJA2.51989
Abstract: Vaccination in pregnancy is the best strategy to reduce complications from influenza or pertussis infection in infants who are too young to be protected directly from vaccination. Pregnant women are also at risk of influenza complications preventable through antenatal vaccination. Both vaccines are funded under the National Immunisation Program for pregnant women in Australia, but coverage is not routinely reported nationally. We reviewed all reported Australian maternal influenza and pertussis vaccine coverage data for the period 2016–2021, to identify gaps and information needs. Maternal influenza vaccine coverage was suboptimal at 58% for 2016–2018, with higher coverage of 62–75% reported in two states (Victoria and Western Australia) for 2019–2021. Maternal pertussis vaccine coverage from 2016 was generally higher than for influenza at 70%, with the highest jurisdictional coverage of 89% reported in Western Australia in 2020. Vaccination rates were often suboptimal among First Nations pregnant women and up to 20% lower than among non‐First Nations Australian women while data were limited, coverage was low among culturally and linguistically erse women and among women of lower socio‐economic status. Jurisdictional perinatal data collections were the best source of information on antenatal vaccine coverage but were only available for a minority of the population a nationally consistent systematic approach is lacking. Timely and comprehensive data are needed to provide feedback to improve maternal vaccination coverage, particularly among groups with higher risk and/or low uptake, and as new vaccines are recommended, including COVID‐19 vaccination.
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 14-06-2018
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date: 19-01-2023
Abstract: Real-world data on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) is limited. This systematic review aimed to investigate the real-world effectiveness and durability of protection conferred by primary course and booster vaccines against confirmed Omicron infection, and severe outcomes. We systematically searched literature up to 1 August 2022. Meta-analysis was performed with the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model to estimate the pooled vaccine effectiveness (VE). Overall, 28 studies were included representing 11 million in iduals. The pooled VE against Omicron infection was 20.4% (95%CI: 12.1–28.7%) and 23.4% (95%CI: 13.5–33.3%) against symptomatic infection with variation based on vaccine type and age groups. VE sharply declined from 28.1% (95%CI: 19.1–37.1%) at three months to 3.9% (95%CI: −24.8–32.7%) at six months. Similar trends were observed for symptomatic Omicron infection. A booster dose restored protection against Omicron infection up to 51.1% (95%CI: 43.8–58.3%) and 57.3% (95%CI: 54.0–60.5%) against symptomatic infection within three months however, this waned to 32.8% (95%CI: 16.8–48.7%) within six months. VE against severe Omicron infection following the primary course was 63.6% (95%CI: 57.5–69.7%) at three months, decreased to 49% (95%CI: 35.7–63.4%) within six months, and increased to 86% after the first or second booster dose.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 04-08-2022
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 12-2021
DOI: 10.1136/BMJGH-2021-007179
Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has overwhelmed health systems in both developed and developing nations alike. Africa has one of the weakest health systems globally, but there is limited evidence on how the region is prepared for, impacted by and responded to the pandemic. We conducted a scoping review of PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL to search peer-reviewed articles and Google, Google Scholar and preprint sites for grey literature. The scoping review captured studies on either preparedness or impacts or responses associated with COVID-19 or covering one or more of the three topics and guided by Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework. The extracted information was documented following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension checklist for scoping reviews. Finally, the resulting data were thematically analysed. Twenty-two eligible studies, of which 6 reported on health system preparedness, 19 described the impacts of COVID-19 on access to general and essential health services and 7 focused on responses taken by the healthcare systems were included. The main setbacks in health system preparation included lack of available health services needed for the pandemic, inadequate resources and equipment, and limited testing ability and surge capacity for COVID-19. Reduced flow of patients and missing scheduled appointments were among the most common impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Health system responses identified in this review included the availability of telephone consultations, re-purposing of available services and establishment of isolation centres, and provisions of COVID-19 guidelines in some settings. The health systems in Africa were inadequately prepared for the pandemic, and its impact was substantial. Responses were slow and did not match the magnitude of the problem. Interventions that will improve and strengthen health system resilience and financing through local, national and global engagement should be prioritised.
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 02-2021
DOI: 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2020-044618
Abstract: The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive evidence on risk factors for transmission, disease severity and COVID-19 related deaths in Africa. A systematic review has been conducted to synthesise existing evidence on risk factors affecting COVID-19 outcomes across Africa. Data were systematically searched from MEDLINE, Scopus, MedRxiv and BioRxiv. Studies for review were included if they were published in English and reported at least one risk factor and/or one health outcome. We included all relevant literature published up until 11 August 2020. We performed a systematic narrative synthesis to describe the available studies for each outcome. Data were extracted using a standardised Joanna Briggs Institute data extraction form. Fifteen articles met the inclusion criteria of which four were exclusively on Africa and the remaining 11 papers had a global focus with some data from Africa. Higher rates of infection in Africa are associated with high population density, urbanisation, transport connectivity, high volume of tourism and international trade, and high level of economic and political openness. Limited or poor access to healthcare are also associated with higher COVID-19 infection rates. Older people and in iduals with chronic conditions such as HIV, tuberculosis and anaemia experience severe forms COVID-19 leading to hospitalisation and death. Similarly, high burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, high prevalence of tobacco consumption and low levels of expenditure on health and low levels of global health security score contribute to COVID-19 related deaths. Demographic, institutional, ecological, health system and politico-economic factors influenced the spectrum of COVID-19 infection, severity and death. We recommend multidisciplinary and integrated approaches to mitigate the identified factors and strengthen effective prevention strategies.
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 02-2021
DOI: 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2020-044606
Abstract: COVID-19 has caused a global public health crisis affecting most countries, including Ethiopia, in various ways. This study maps the vulnerability to infection, case severity and likelihood of death from COVID-19 in Ethiopia. Thirty-eight potential indicators of vulnerability to COVID-19 infection, case severity and likelihood of death, identified based on a literature review and the availability of nationally representative data at a low geographic scale, were assembled from multiple sources for geospatial analysis. Geospatial analysis techniques were applied to produce maps showing the vulnerability to infection, case severity and likelihood of death in Ethiopia at a spatial resolution of 1 km×1 km. This study showed that vulnerability to COVID-19 infection is likely to be high across most parts of Ethiopia, particularly in the Somali, Afar, Amhara, Oromia and Tigray regions. The number of severe cases of COVID-19 infection requiring hospitalisation and intensive care unit admission is likely to be high across Amhara, most parts of Oromia and some parts of the Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples’ Region. The risk of COVID-19-related death is high in the country’s border regions, where public health preparedness for responding to COVID-19 is limited. This study revealed geographical differences in vulnerability to infection, case severity and likelihood of death from COVID-19 in Ethiopia. The study offers maps that can guide the targeted interventions necessary to contain the spread of COVID-19 in Ethiopia.
Location: Australia
No related grants have been discovered for Dr Hassen Mohammed.