Corrosion evaluation of one dry desulfurization equipment – Circulating fluidized bed boiler
In: Materials & Design, Band 32, Heft 2, S. 671-681
13 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Materials & Design, Band 32, Heft 2, S. 671-681
In: Reproductive sciences: RS : the official journal of the Society for Reproductive Investigation, Band 16, Heft 10, S. 1001-1004
ISSN: 1933-7205
In: Materials & Design, Band 31, Heft 9, S. 4258-4268
In: Land use policy: the international journal covering all aspects of land use, Band 42, S. 381-391
ISSN: 0264-8377
In: GLOPLACHA-D-22-00039
SSRN
In: STOTEN-D-22-10099
SSRN
In: Environmental science and pollution research: ESPR, Band 30, Heft 49, S. 107365-107370
ISSN: 1614-7499
In: Materials & Design, Band 32, Heft 5, S. 2763-2770
SSRN
In: Environmental science and pollution research: ESPR, Band 25, Heft 31, S. 31543-31557
ISSN: 1614-7499
In: Waste management: international journal of integrated waste management, science and technology, Band 170, S. 215-229
ISSN: 1879-2456
The present study assessed the willingness of the general population to receive COVID-19 vaccines and identified factors that influence vaccine hesitancy and resistance. A national online survey was conducted from 29 January 2021 to 26 April 2021 in China. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors that influence vaccine hesitancy and resistance. Of the 34,041 participants surveyed, 18,810 (55.3%) were willing to get vaccinated, 13,736 (40.3%) were hesitant, and 1495 (4.4%) were resistant. Rates of vaccine acceptance increased over time, with geographical discrepancies in vaccine hesitancy and resistance between provinces in China. Vaccine safety was the greatest concern expressed by most participants (24,461 [71.9%]), and the major reason for participants' refusing vaccination (974 [65.2%]). Government agencies (23,131 [68.0%]) and social media (20,967 [61.6%]) were the main sources of COVID-19 vaccine information. Compared with vaccination acceptance, female, young and middle-aged, high income, and perceived low-risk of infection were associated with vaccine hesitancy. Histories of allergic reactions to other vaccines and depression symptoms were related to vaccine resistance. Common factors that influenced vaccine hesitancy and resistance were residing in cities and perceiving less protection with vaccines than with other protective measures. The results indicate that the rate of vaccine resistance is relatively low, but vaccine hesitancy is common. Individuals who are female, young and middle-aged, with a high income, and residing in cities are more likely to be hesitant for vaccination and should be the target populations for vaccination campaigns. Specific vaccine messaging from the government and social media could alleviate public concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy.
BASE
In recent decades, respiratory infections, including SARS, HINI and the currently spreading COVID-19, caused by various viruses such as influenza and coronavirus have seriously threatened human health. It has generated inconsistent recommendations on the mandatory use of facemasks across countries on a population level due to insufficient evidence on the efficacy of facemask use among the general population. This meta-analysis aimed to explore (1) the efficacy of facemask use on preventing respiratory infections, and (2) the perceptions, intentions, and practice about facemask use among the general population worldwide. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, bioRxiv, and medRxiv databases since inception to August 17, 2020. From 21,341 records identified, eight RCTs on facemask in preventing infections and 78 studies on perception, intention, and practice of facemask use among the general population were included in the analysis. The meta-analysis of RCTs found a significant protective effect of facemask intervention (OR = 0.84; 95% CI = 0.71–0.99; I(2) = 0%). This protective effect was even more pronounced when the intervention duration was more than two weeks (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.66–0.88; I(2) = 0%). The meta-analysis of observational studies on perception, intention, and practice on facemask use showed that 71% of respondents perceived facemasks to be effective for infection prevention, 68% of respondents would wear facemasks, and 54% of respondents wore facemasks for preventing respiratory infections. Differences in perception, intention, and practice behavior of facemask use in different regions may be related to the impact of respiratory infections, regional culture, and policies. The governments and relevant organizations should make effort to reduce the barriers in the use of facemasks.
BASE