To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Healthcare workers (HCWs) are a high-priority group for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and serve as sources for public information. In this analysis, we assessed vaccine intentions, factors associated with intentions, and change in uptake over time in HCWs.
A prospective cohort study of COVID-19 seroprevalence was conducted with HCWs in a large healthcare system in the Chicago area. Participants completed surveys from November 25, 2020, to January 9, 2021, and from April 24 to July 12, 2021, on COVID-19 exposures, diagnosis and symptoms, demographics, and vaccination status.
Of 4,180 HCWs who responded to a survey, 77.1% indicated that they intended to get the vaccine. In this group, 23.2% had already received at least 1 dose of the vaccine, 17.4% were unsure, and 5.5% reported that they would not get the vaccine. Factors associated with intention or vaccination were being exposed to clinical procedures (vs no procedures: adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16–1.65) and having a negative serology test for COVID-19 (vs no test: AOR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.24–1.73). Nurses (vs physicians: AOR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.17–0.33), non-Hispanic Black (vs Asians: AOR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.21–0.59), and women (vs men: AOR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.30–0.50) had lower odds of intention to get vaccinated. By 6-months follow-up, >90% of those who had previously been unsure were vaccinated, whereas 59.7% of those who previously reported no intention of getting vaccinated, were vaccinated.
COVID-19 vaccination in HCWs was high, but variability in vaccination intention exists. Targeted messaging coupled with vaccine mandates can support uptake.
To determine the changes in severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) serologic status and SARS-CoV-2 infection rates in healthcare workers (HCWs) over 6-months of follow-up.
Prospective cohort study.
Setting and participants:
HCWs in the Chicago area.
Cohort participants were recruited in May and June 2020 for baseline serology testing (Abbott anti-nucleocapsid IgG) and were then invited for follow-up serology testing 6 months later. Participants completed monthly online surveys that assessed demographics, medical history, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and exposures to SARS-CoV-2. The electronic medical record was used to identify SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positivity during follow-up. Serologic conversion and SARS-CoV-2 infection or possible reinfection rates (cases per 10,000 person days) by antibody status at baseline and follow-up were assessed.
In total, 6,510 HCWs were followed for a total of 1,285,395 person days (median follow-up, 216 days). For participants who had baseline and follow-up serology checked, 285 (6.1%) of the 4,681 seronegative participants at baseline seroconverted to positive at follow-up; 138 (48%) of the 263 who were seropositive at baseline were seronegative at follow-up. When analyzed by baseline serostatus alone, 519 (8.4%) of 6,194 baseline seronegative participants had a positive PCR after baseline serology testing (4.25 per 10,000 person days). Of 316 participants who were seropositive at baseline, 8 (2.5%) met criteria for possible SARS-CoV-2 reinfection (ie, PCR positive >90 days after baseline serology) during follow-up, a rate of 1.27 per 10,000 days at risk. The adjusted rate ratio for possible reinfection in baseline seropositive compared to infection in baseline seronegative participants was 0.26 (95% confidence interval, 0.13–0.53).
Seropositivity in HCWs is associated with moderate protection from future SARS-CoV-2 infection.
We observed a higher rate of blood-culture contamination during the COVID-19 pandemic at our institution compared to a prepandemic period. Given the potential implications of blood contamination in antibiotic and diagnostic test utilization as well as added cost, it is imperative to continue efforts to minimize these episodes during the pandemic.
Everything we do involves language. Assuming no prior knowledge, this book offers students a contemporary introduction to the study of language. Each thought-provoking chapter is accessible to readers from a variety of fields, and is helpfully organized across six parts: sound; structure and meaning; language typologies and change; language and social aspects; language acquisition; and language, cognition, and the brain. The book's companion website also offers three brief chapters on language and computers; animal communication; and dialectal varieties of English. The chapters feature illustrative tables, figures and maps, along with three types of pedagogical boxes (Linguistic Tidbits; Pause and Reflect; and Eyes on World Languages) that break up text, contextualize information, and provide colourful accents that give real data from languages across the globe. Key words are bolded and defined in a glossary at the end of the book, while end-of-chapter summaries and practice exercises reinforce the key points discussed.
Chapter 1 presents key concepts that are not only of general interest but are useful in understanding subsequent chapters. Although many people place linguistics as foundational for the humanities, we show that it is also a science that develops theories and hypotheses that are rigorously tested. As is typical in scientific inquiry, linguistics seeks to describe and explain an object of study, in our case, language. The chapter also examines how human language differs from other systems of communication, such as animal cries or some visual images. An important component of the chapter distinguishes two main approaches to the study of language: the generativist approach according to which language is constrained by universal principles that are innate, and a more functionalist approach that considers language to be acquired solely on the basis of input. For both functionalist and generativists, input is essential to acquisition. These approaches can be seen in action throughout the book and both are equally important to the field of linguistics. The chapter ends by pointing to different fields that engage with professional linguists, from translation studies to computer science.