Iryna Sabat

Mrs. Iryna Sabat

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 September 2020 in Health Policy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ISIryna Sabat
Iryna Sabat
SNSebastian Neumann-Böhme
Sebastian Neumann-Böhme
NVNirosha Elsem Varghese
Nirosha Elsem Varghese
PBPedro Pita Barros
Pedro Pita Barros
WBWerner Brouwer
Werner Brouwer
TSTom Stargardt
Tom Stargardt
To understand the public sentiment toward the measures used by policymakers for COVID-19 containment, a survey among representative samples of the population in seven European countries was carried out in the first two weeks of April 2020. The study addressed people's support for containment policies, worries about COVID-19 consequences, and trust in sources of information. Citizens were overall satisfied with their government's response to the pandemic; however, the extent of approval differed across countries and policy measures. A north-south divide in public opinion was noticeable across the European states. It was particularly pronounced for intrusive policy measures, such as mobile data use for movement tracking, economic concerns, and trust in the information from the national government. Considerable differences in people's attitudes were noticed within countries, especially across individual regions and age groups. The findings suggest that the epidemic acts as a stressor, causing health and economic anxieties even in households that were not directly affected by the virus. At the same time, the burden of stress was unequally distributed across regions and age groups. Based on the data collected, we draw lessons from the containment stage and identify several insights that can facilitate the design of lockdown exit strategies and future containment policies so that a high level of compliance can be expected.

18 October 2022 in Psychiatry Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AHAndré Hajek
André Hajek
SNSebastian Neumann-Böhme
Sebastian Neumann-Böhme
ISIryna Sabat
Iryna Sabat
ATAleksandra Torbica
Aleksandra Torbica
JSJonas Schreyögg
Jonas Schreyögg
HKHans-Helmut König
Hans-Helmut König

16 July 2023 in Vaccine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ISIryna Sabat
Iryna Sabat
SNSebastian Neumann-Böhme
Sebastian Neumann-Böhme
PBPedro Pita Barros
Pedro Pita Barros
ATAleksandra Torbica
Aleksandra Torbica
NEN.J.A. Van Exel
N.J.A. Van Exel
JSJonas Schreyögg
Jonas Schreyögg
This paper investigates the prevalence and determinants of three main states of people's willingness to be vaccinated (WTBV) against COVID-19 - willing, unwilling and hesitant - and the occurrence and predictors of shifts between these states over time. Understanding the dynamics of vaccine intentions is crucial for developing targeted campaigns to increase uptake and emergency response preparedness. A panel survey consisting of 9 quarterly waves of data collected between April 2020 and January 2022. Baseline data included 24 952 adults from Germany, UK, Denmark, the Netherlands, France, Portugal, and Italy recruited from online panels to construct census-matched nationally representative samples. Self-reported COVID-19 vaccine intention was the main outcome. Multinomial logit random effects models were used to analyze the relationships of interest. All results reported as relative risk ratios (RRR). Hesitancy to get vaccinated was the most unstable vaccine intention, with on average 42% of ever hesitant respondents remaining in this state through future waves, followed by the 'unwilling' (53%) and 'willing (82%). Following COVID-19 news, trust in information from the government, GPs and the WHO, risk preferences, risk perceptions, and confidence in vaccines (or lack thereof) predicted vaccination intention reversals. Risk preferences acted both as an impediment and as a facilitator for the vaccine uptake depending on the initial vaccine intention. This study revealed the dynamic nature of COVID-19 vaccine intentions and its predictors in 7 European countries. The findings provide insights to policymakers for designing more effective communication strategies, particularly targeted at hesitant and unwilling to vaccinate population groups, to increase vaccine uptake for future public health emergencies.

6 March 2021 in Mathematics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Julio Emilio Marco-FrancoJulio Emilio Marco-Franco
Julio Emilio Marco-Franco
PPPedro Pita-Barros
Pedro Pita-Barros
SGSilvia González-de-Julián
Silvia González-de-Julián
ISIryna Sabat
Iryna Sabat
David Vivas-ConsueloDavid Vivas-Consuelo
David Vivas-Consuelo
When exceptional situations, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, arise and reliable data is not available at decision-making times, estimation using mathematical models can provide a reasonable reckoning for health planning. We present a simplified model (static but with two-time references) for estimating the cost-effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine. A simplified model provides a quick assessment of the upper bound of cost-effectiveness, as we illustrate with data from Spain, and allows for easy comparisons between countries. It may also provide useful comparisons among different vaccines at the marketplace, from the perspective of the buyer. From the analysis of this information, key epidemiological figures, and costs of the disease for Spain have been estimated, based on mortality. The fatality rate is robust data that can alternatively be obtained from death registers, funeral homes, cemeteries, and crematoria. Our model estimates the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) to be 5132 € (4926–5276) as of 17 February 2021, based on the following assumptions/inputs: An estimated cost of 30 euros per dose (plus transport, storing, and administration), two doses per person, efficacy of 70% and coverage of 70% of the population. Even considering the possibility of some bias, this simplified model provides confirmation that vaccination against COVID-19 is highly cost-effective.

1 September 2022 in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JEJoost J. Enzing
Joost J. Enzing
FKFrédérique C. W. van Krugten
Frédérique C. W. van Krugten
ISIryna Sabat
Iryna Sabat
SNSebastian Neumann-Böhme
Sebastian Neumann-Böhme
BBBert Boer
Bert Boer
ATAleksandra Torbica
Aleksandra Torbica
Introduction: To make efficient use of available resources, decision-makers in healthcare may assess the costs and (health) benefits of health interventions. For interventions aimed at improving mental health capturing the full health benefits is an important challenge. The Mental Health Quality of Life (MHQoL) instrument was recently developed to meet this challenge. Evaluating the pyschometric properties of this instrument in different contexts remains important. Methods: A psychometric evaluation of the MHQoL was performed using existing international, cross-sectional data with 7155 respondents from seven European countries (Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, The Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom). Reliability was examined by calculating Cronbach’s alpha, a measure of internal consistency of the seven MHQoL dimensions, and by examining the association of the MHQoL sum scores with the MHQoL-VAS scores. Construct validity was examined by calculating Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients between the MHQoL sum scores and EQ-5D index scores, EQ-VAS scores, EQ-5D anxiety/depression dimension scores, ICECAP-A index scores and PHQ-4 sum scores. Results: The MHQoL was found to have good internal consistency for all seven countries. The MHQoL sum score and the MHQoL-VAS had a high correlation. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients were moderate to very high for all outcomes. Conclusion: Our results, based on data gathered in seven European countries, suggest that the MHQoL shows favourable psychometrical characteristics. While further validation remains important, the MHQoL may be a useful instrument in measuring mental health-related quality of life in the Western European context.

1 September 2020 in European Journal of Public Health
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ISIryna Sabat
Iryna Sabat
NVN Elsem Varghese
N Elsem Varghese
SNS Neuman-Böhme
S Neuman-Böhme
PBP Pita Barros
P Pita Barros
WBW Brouwer
W Brouwer
TST Stargardt
T Stargardt
To understand the public sentiment toward the measures used by policymakers for COVID-19 containment, a survey among representative samples of the population in seven European countries was carried out in the first two weeks of April 2020. The study addressed people's support for containment policies, worries about COVID-19 consequences, and trust in sources of information. Citizens were overall satisfied with their government's response to the pandemic; however, the extent of approval differed across countries and policy measures. A north-south divide in public opinion was noticeable across the European states. It was particularly pronounced for intrusive policy measures, such as mobile data use for movement tracking, economic concerns, and trust in the information from the national government. Considerable differences in people's attitudes were noticed within countries, especially across individual regions and age groups. The findings suggest that the epidemic acts as a stressor, causing health and economic anxieties even in households that were not directly affected by the virus. At the same time, the burden of stress was unequally distributed across regions and age groups. Based on the data collected, we draw lessons from the containment stage and identify several insights that can facilitate the design of lockdown exit strategies and future containment policies so that a high level of compliance can be expected. Key messages: Citizens were overall satisfied with their government's response to the COVID-19 outbreak. A north-south pattern in public opinion was observed across the European states.