Samar Galal Kabeel
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Samar Galal Kabeel has a total of 35 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Abdallah Almaghraby
Department of Cardiology, Ibrahim Bin Hamad Obaidallah Hospital, EHS, Ras Al Khaimah, United Arab Emirates
1 shared publication - Ahmed Awd
Physical Therapy Department, Kafr El-Sheikh General Hospital, MoHP, Kafr El-Sheikh 33511, Egypt
1 shared publication - Ahmed El-Sayed Nour El-Deen
Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Assuit, Egypt
1 shared publication - Alaa Hamdy Taha Khalil
Physician, Cairo University Medical School
1 shared publication - Amr Alnagar
General Surgery Department, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Al Attarin, Egypt
1 shared publication - Dina Mohamed Hafez
Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
Effectiveness and Safety of Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine (BBIBP-CorV) among Healthcare Workers: A Seven-Month Follow-Up Study at Fifteen Central Hospitals
Background: During a pandemic, healthcare workers are at high risk of contracting COVID-19. To protect these important individuals, it is highly recommended that they receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Our study focused on evaluating the safety and efficacy of Egypt’s first approved vaccine, the Sinopharm vaccine (BBIBP-CorV), and comparing these findings with other vaccines. Methods: An observational study was conducted in fifteen triage and isolation hospitals, from the 1st of March until the end of September 2021. The study included fully vaccinated and unvaccinated participants, and we measured vaccine effectiveness (using 1-aHR), the incidence rate of severely to critically ill hospitalized cases, COVID-19-related work absenteeism, and the safety of the vaccine as outcomes. Results: Of the 1364 healthcare workers who were interviewed, 1228 agreed to participate. After taking the hazard ratio into account, the vaccine effectiveness was found to be 67% (95% CI, 80–43%) for symptomatic PCR-confirmed cases. The incidence rate ratio for hospitalization was 0.45 (95% CI, 0.15–1.31) in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated group, and there was a significant reduction in absenteeism among the vaccinated group (p < 0.007). Most adverse events were mild and well tolerated. Vaccinated pregnant and lactating mothers did not experience any sentinel adverse events. Conclusion: Our study found that the BBIBP-CorV vaccine was effective in protecting healthcare workers from COVID-19.
Open AccessEffectiveness and Safety of Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine (BBIBP-CorV) among Healthcare Workers: A Seven-Month Follow-Up Study at Fifteen Central Hospitals
Background: During a pandemic, healthcare workers are at high risk of contracting COVID-19. To protect these important individuals, it is highly recommended that they receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Our study focused on evaluating the safety and efficacy of Egypt’s first approved vaccine, the Sinopharm vaccine (BBIBP-CorV), and comparing these findings with other vaccines. Methods: An observational study was conducted in fifteen triage and isolation hospitals, from the 1st of March until the end of September 2021. The study included fully vaccinated and unvaccinated participants, and we measured vaccine effectiveness (using 1-aHR), the incidence rate of severely to critically ill hospitalized cases, COVID-19-related work absenteeism, and the safety of the vaccine as outcomes. Results: Of the 1364 healthcare workers who were interviewed, 1228 agreed to participate. After taking the hazard ratio into account, the vaccine effectiveness was found to be 67% (95% CI, 80–43%) for symptomatic PCR-confirmed cases. The incidence rate ratio for hospitalization was 0.45 (95% CI, 0.15–1.31) in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated group, and there was a significant reduction in absenteeism among the vaccinated group (p < 0.007). Most adverse events were mild and well tolerated. Vaccinated pregnant and lactating mothers did not experience any sentinel adverse events. Conclusion: Our study found that the BBIBP-CorV vaccine was effective in protecting healthcare workers from COVID-19.
- Open Access
Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy
Background: The presented meta-analysis was developed in response to the publication of several studies addressing COVID-19 vaccines hesitancy. We aimed to identify the proportion of vaccine acceptance and rejection, and factors affecting vaccine hesitancy worldwide especially with the fast emergency approval of vaccines. Methods: Online database search was performed, and relevant studies were included with no language restriction. A meta-analysis was conducted using R software to obtain the random effect model of the pooled prevalence of vaccine acceptance and rejection. Egger’s regression test was performed to assess publication bias. Quality assessment was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale quality assessment tool. Results: Thirty-nine out of 12246 articles met the predefined inclusion criteria. All studies were cross-sectional designs. The pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was 17% (95% CI: 14-20) while the pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was 75% (95% CI: 71-79). The vaccine hesitancy and the vaccine acceptance showed high heterogeneity (I 2 =100%). Case fatality ratio and the number of reported cases had significant effect on the vaccine acceptance as the pooled proportion of vaccine acceptance increased by 39.95% (95% CI: 20.1-59.8) for each 1% increase in case fatality (P<0.0001) and decreased by 0.1% (95% CI: -0.2-0.01) for each 1000 reported case of COVID-19, P= 0.0183). Conclusion: Transparency in reporting the number of newly diagnosed COVID-19 cases and deaths is mandatory as these factors are the main determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance.
Open AccessSystematic Review and Meta-analysis on COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy
Background: The presented meta-analysis was developed in response to the publication of several studies addressing COVID-19 vaccines hesitancy. We aimed to identify the proportion of vaccine acceptance and rejection, and factors affecting vaccine hesitancy worldwide especially with the fast emergency approval of vaccines. Methods: Online database search was performed, and relevant studies were included with no language restriction. A meta-analysis was conducted using R software to obtain the random effect model of the pooled prevalence of vaccine acceptance and rejection. Egger’s regression test was performed to assess publication bias. Quality assessment was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale quality assessment tool. Results: Thirty-nine out of 12246 articles met the predefined inclusion criteria. All studies were cross-sectional designs. The pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was 17% (95% CI: 14-20) while the pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was 75% (95% CI: 71-79). The vaccine hesitancy and the vaccine acceptance showed high heterogeneity (I 2 =100%). Case fatality ratio and the number of reported cases had significant effect on the vaccine acceptance as the pooled proportion of vaccine acceptance increased by 39.95% (95% CI: 20.1-59.8) for each 1% increase in case fatality (P<0.0001) and decreased by 0.1% (95% CI: -0.2-0.01) for each 1000 reported case of COVID-19, P= 0.0183). Conclusion: Transparency in reporting the number of newly diagnosed COVID-19 cases and deaths is mandatory as these factors are the main determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance.