ABSTRACT
Rollouts of COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S. were opportunities to redress disparities that surfaced during the pandemic. Initial eligibility criteria, however, neglected geographic, racial/ethnic, and socioeconomic considerations. Marginalized populations may have faced barriers to then-scarce vaccines, reinforcing disparities. Inequalities may have subsided as eligibility expanded. Using spatial modeling, we investigate how strongly local vaccination levels were associated with socioeconomic and racial/ethnic composition as authorities first extended vaccine eligibility to all adults. We harmonize administrative, demographic, and geospatial data across postal codes in eight large U.S. cities over three weeks in Spring 2021. We find that, although vaccines were free regardless of health insurance coverage, local vaccination levels in March and April were negatively associated with poverty, enrollment in means-tested public health insurance (e.g., Medicaid), and the uninsured population. By April, vaccination levels in Black and Hispanic communities were only beginning to reach those of Asian and White communities in March. Increases in vaccination were smaller in socioeconomically disadvantaged Black and Hispanic communities than in more affluent, Asian, and White communities. Our findings suggest vaccine rollouts contributed to cumulative disadvantage. Populations that were left most vulnerable to COVID-19 benefited least from early expansions in vaccine availability in large U.S. cities.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This project was supported by the California Center for Population Research at UCLA with training support (T32HD007545) and core support (P2CHD041022) from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NICHD or the National Institutes of Health.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study involves only openly available human data, which can be obtained from sources provided in Table 1 of the paper. Please see section e2.1 for more details.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
* Direct correspondence to S. Michael Gaddis at mgaddis{at}soc.ucla.edu or c/o UCLA Department of Sociology, Box 951551, 264 Haines Hall, Los Angeles CA 90095-1551. This project was supported by the California Center for Population Research at UCLA with training support (T32HD007545) and core support (P2CHD041022) from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NICHD or the National Institutes of Health. This work used computational and storage services associated with the Hoffman2 Shared Cluster, provided by the UCLA Institute for Digital Research and Education. Thanks to Jonathan Daw, Ka-Yuet Liu, and Elizabeth Wrigley-Field for comments and suggestions. Additional thanks to Marc Caswell and Alexis Lantz.
↵e We detail how we interpolated units of analysis that could be meaningfully compared given agencies’ diverging reporting practices in Section e3.2.
↵f We further introduce ZCTAs in Section e3.1.
↵g We introduce CBGs in Section e3.2.
↵h We introduce ZCTAs in Section e3.1.
↵i As the third column of Table e2.2 shows, the ACS tables were sampled from different sub-populations. Variation in the universes was slight and unproblematic for our analysis.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
