Themistocleous, Sophia C.

Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has evidenced the key role of vaccine design, obtention, production and administration to successfully fight against infectious diseases and to provide efficient remedies for the citizens. Although clinical trials were rapidly established during this pandemic, identifying suitable study subjects can be challenging. For this reason, the University Hospital Cologne established a volunteer registry for participation in clinical trials first in Germany, which has now been incorporated into the European VACCELERATE clinical trials network and grew to a European Volunteer Registry. As such, VACCELERATE's Volunteer Registry aims to become a common entry point for potential volunteers in future clinical trials in Europe. Methods: Interested volunteers who would like to register for clinical trials in the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry can access the registration questionnaire via http://www.vaccelerate.eu/volunteer-registry. Potential volunteers are requested to provide their current country and area of residence, contact information, including first and last name and e-mail address, age, gender, comorbidities, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination status, and maximum distance willing to travel to a clinical trial site. The registry is open to both adults and children, complying with national legal consent requirements. Results: As of May 2022, the questionnaire is available in 12 countries and 14 languages. Up to date, more than 36,000 volunteers have registered, mainly from Germany. Within the first year since its establishment, the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry has matched more than 15,000 volunteers to clinical trials. The VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry will be launched in further European countries in the coming months. Conclusions: The VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry is an active single-entry point for European residents interested in COVID-19 clinical trials participation in 12 countries (i.e., Austria, Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Lithuania, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Turkey). To date, more than 15,000 registered individuals have been connected to clinical trials in Germany alone. The registry is currently in the implementation phase in 5 additional countries (i.e., Belgium, Czech Republic, Hungary, Israel and the Netherlands).

Background: The VACCELERATE Pan-European Scientific network aims to strengthen the foundation of vaccine trial research across Europe by following the principles of equity, inclusion, and diversity. The VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry network provides access to vaccine trial sites across the European region and supports a sustainable volunteer platform for identifying potential participants for forthcoming vaccine clinical research. Objective: The aim of this study was to approach members of patient advocacy groups (PAGs) across Europe to assess their willingness to register for the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry and their perspectives related to participating in vaccine trials. Methods: In an effort to understand how to increase recruitment for the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry, a standardized survey was developed in English and translated into 8 different languages (Dutch, English, French, German, Greek, Italian, Spanish, and Swedish) by the respective National Coordinator team. The online, anonymous survey was circulated, from March 2022 to May 2022, to PAGs across 10 European countries (Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Spain, and Sweden) to share with their members. The questionnaire constituted of multiple choice and open-ended questions evaluating information regarding participants’ perceptions on participating in vaccine trials and their willingness to become involved in the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry. Results: In total, 520 responses were collected and analyzed. The PAG members reported that the principal criteria influencing their decision to participate in clinical trials overall are (1) the risks involved, (2) the benefits that will be gained from their potential participation, and (3) the quality and quantity of information provided regarding the trial. The survey revealed that, out of the 520 respondents, 133 individuals across all age groups were “positive” toward registering in the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry, with an additional 47 individuals reporting being “very positive.” Respondents from Northern European countries were 1.725 (95% CI 1.206-2.468) times more likely to be willing to participate in the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry than respondents from Southern European countries. Conclusions: Factors discouraging participants from joining vaccine trial registries or clinical trials primarily include concerns of the safety of novel vaccines and a lack of trust in those involved in vaccine development. These outcomes aid in identifying issues and setbacks in present registries, providing the VACCELERATE network with feedback on how to potentially increase participation and enrollment in trials across Europe. Development of European health communication strategies among diverse public communities, especially via PAGs, is the key for increasing patients’ willingness to participate in clinical studies.

Aim: To investigate medical students’ burnout and motivation levels in each of the six years of their studies during the COVID-19 pandemic and identify independent predictors of burnout and motivation. Methods: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was sent to the students of all six years within our school. Burnout was measured with the adapted Oldenburg Burnout Inventory questionnaire (OLBI-S) and motivation with the updated Strength of Motivation for Medical School (SMMS-R) questionnaire. Univariate analysis was performed with the Kruskal–Wallis test and Spearman’s correlation, while multivariable analysis with linear regression models. Results: A total of 333 medical students (52% of student body) responded. Higher burnout levels correlated with lower motivation to study medicine (rho = −0.30, p < 0.001). Burnout levels differed between the six years of medical studies, peaking in years two and four whereas being the lowest in year one (p = 0.01). Motivation levels differed significantly as well, peaking in years one and four whereas being the lowest in years five and six (p = 0.012). In the multivariable linear regression models, being a female (b = 2.22, p = 0.016), studying in the fourth year vs. first year (b = 2.54, p = 0.049), having a perceived beginner/intermediate vs. advanced/expert technology level (b = 2.05, p = 0.032) and a perceived poor school support system (b = 6.35, p < 0.001) were independently associated with higher burnout levels. Furthermore, studying in the fifth year vs. first year (b = −5.17, p = 0.019) and a perceived poor school support system (b = −3.09, p = 0.01) were independently associated with a reduced motivation to study medicine. Conclusion: Our study highlighted potential areas for intervention to decrease the rate of burnout and low motivation among medical students. However, further research is needed to unravel the full effect of the pandemic on medical students.

The Covid-19 pandemic disrupted medical education, shifting it towards emergency remote delivery. This cross-sectional study aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on preclinical medical education and identify predictors of the virtual learning experience and perceived stress. An anonymous survey was delivered electronically to the students of the authors' medical school that attended either histology or pathology. This survey contained two scales, the virtual learning experience (VLE) and the perceived stress scale-10 (PSS-10). A total of 173/255 (68%) responded, showing a positive perception towards the remote delivery of both courses. An exploratory factor analysis was performed on the VLE scale items and four new dimensions were formed: “course quality and learning outcomes”, “student motivation”, virtual against F2F learning”, and “virtual laboratory sessions”. The following significant predictors of enhanced VLE, in at least one dimension, were identified: female gender, pathology course, final examination grade >80%, lower perceived stress levels, studying in home country, and holding of another degree before medical school. In addition, the following predictors were significantly associated with higher levels of student perceived stress: female gender, pathology course, studying away from home, and suboptimal internet connection. Notably, the quality of internet connection was significantly associated with the students' final examination performance. Concerning the best mode for future delivery of both courses, most students proposed a blended, rather than an entirely on-campus or online approach. In conclusion, despite its problems, a high-quality remote preclinical medical education was possible in the authors' school and offered tremendous opportunities for future improvement.