Search

Many studies have examined behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation, but few have examined these drivers longitudinally. We sought to identify the drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation using the Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination (BeSD) Framework. Participants were a nationally-representative sample of 1,563 US adults who had not received a COVID-19 vaccine by baseline. Participants took surveys online at baseline (spring 2021) and follow-up (fall 2021). The surveys assessed variables from BeSD Framework domains (i.e., thinking and feeling, social processes, and practical issues), COVID-19 vaccination initiation, and demographics at baseline and follow-up. Between baseline and follow-up, 65% of respondents reported initiating COVID-19 vaccination. Vaccination intent increased from baseline to follow-up (p <.01). Higher vaccine confidence, more positive social norms towards vaccination, and receiving vaccine recommendations at baseline predicted subsequent COVID-19 vaccine initiation (all p <.01). Among factors assessed at follow-up, social responsibility and vaccine requirements had the greatest associations with vaccine initiation (all p <.01). Baseline vaccine confidence, social norms, and vaccination recommendations were associated with subsequent vaccine initiation, all of which could be useful targets for behavioral interventions. Furthermore, interventions that highlight social responsibility to vaccinate or promote vaccination requirements could also be beneficial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research has shown that building public trust in institutions contributes to vaccine confidence. However, this association has not been validated in the cross-cultural context, which requires retesting using a larger, and more representative cross-cultural sample and considering potential moderating factors, such as sociocultural context. Using a large sample from Gallup (involving 102,156 participants from 134 countries), we explored the link of institutional trust and vaccine confidence in a global context, and the role of cultural religiosity and individualism in this relationship. Individual-level institutional trust and vaccine confidence were measured using respective Gallup data. Country-level cultural religiosity scores were used to capture the sociocultural context, while Hofstede's individualism scores reflected the societal inclination towards individual or collective orientation. The results of the multilevel analyses found that institutional trust positively correlates with vaccine confidence on the global scale. Furthermore, the benefits of institutional trust on vaccine confidence is weaker in more religious or individualistic countries. We also identified several individual and cross-country characteristics that influence vaccine confidence, such as age, income, Gini coefficient, and uncertainty avoidance. These findings reveal the influence of individual factors on vaccine confidence and emphasize the importance of understanding the interaction of personal factors with sociocultural context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is a major public health problem which includes not only concerns about vaccine, but often includes beliefs not aligned with evidence. The etiology of VH is complicate, including genuine concerns about vaccine safety to beliefs in disproven or unsubstantiated theories. Understanding VH includes determining the factors associated with people most likely to be susceptible. Objectives: To identify characteristics of persons more likely to have VH based on perceived vaccine safety. Design: We conducted a cross sectional, targeted online survey of 1,024 respondents. Methods: The survey collected data on demographics and vaccine beliefs. A seven-question VH scale was created based on an extensive literature review. When measured, this scale had high internal validity based on Cronbach's Alpha (α = 0.80, 95% CI, 0.79, 0.82) and provided a continuous measurement to understand the VH degree. Results: Persons reporting a conservative political ideology had the highest VH score ( = 15.0), followed by other ( =12.7), moderate ( =9.29), and liberal ( =6.72). Education level was another strong indicator of VH, decreasing from the highest score of high school graduates ( = 13.2) to graduate degree holders ( = 9.22). Conclusion: The more conservative a person's political ideology, the higher the VHS. We asked for ideology, rather than political party, although they are related, they are not the same. Ideology influences more domains than voting patterns. Higher educational attainment shows a protective effect against VH. These findings have direct implication for public health interventions, new interventions should be designed to be more accessible for persons with less formal education and more amenable to persons who hold a more conservative ideology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of our study was to identify primary care providers' (PCPs') practices in promoting childhood vaccination and their perceptions regarding barriers to vaccination in a primarily rural state. In January-May 2022, we conducted a mail and online survey of PCPs across Montana (n = 829). The survey included modules on routine immunizations in children 0–2 years old and COVID-19 vaccination in children 5–17 years old. The survey response rate was 36% (298/829). We categorized PCPs as working in rural (n = 218) or urban areas (n = 80), based on Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes. We then compared responses between rural and urban PCPs using chi-square tests. Urban PCPs (90–94%, depending on vaccine) stocked routinely recommended vaccines more frequently than rural PCPs (71–84%), but stocked the COVID-19 vaccine less often than rural PCPs (44% vs. 71%, respectively, p < 0.001). A higher percentage of rural providers reported parental beliefs that vaccine-preventable diseases are not severe enough to warrant vaccination (48% vs. 31%, p = 0.01) and concerns that vaccination will weaken their child's immune system (29% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). More rural (74%) compared to urban (59%) PCPs identified a social media campaign from local health departments promoting early childhood vaccinations as an effective strategy to increase childhood vaccination rates (p = 0.01). We identified key differences in some childhood vaccination practices and barriers between rural and urban PCPs. Interventions to increase rural vaccination rates could include increasing the number of providers stocking all recommended vaccines, identifying strategies to address parents' concerns regarding vaccine necessity, and collaborations with public health departments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding the roots of Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy in at-risk groups, such as persons living with HIV (PLWH), is of utmost importance. We developed a modified Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) questionnaire using items from the National Advisory Committee on Immunization Acceptability Matrix. To examine factors associated with receiving COVID-19 vaccine and the link between vaccine attitudes and beliefs with vaccine behavior, PLWH were recruited via social media and community-based organizations (February-May 2022). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize results. Total VHS score was generated by adding Likert scale scores and linear regression models used to compare results between participants who received or did not receive COVID-19 vaccines. Logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with vaccine uptake. A total of 246 PLWH indicated whether they received a COVID-19 vaccine. 89% received ≥ 1 dose. Mean total VHS(SD) for persons having received ≥ 1 COVID-19 vaccine was 17.8(6.2) vs. 35.4(9.4) for participants not having received any COVID-19 vaccine. Persons who received ≥ 1 dose were significantly older than those who had not received any (48.4 ± 13.8 vs. 34.0 ± 7.7 years, p < 0.0001). The majority of participants considered COVID-19 vaccination important for their health(81.3%) and the health of others(84.4%). Multivariate logistic regression revealed the odds of taking ≥ 1dose were increased 2.4-fold [95% CI 1.6, 3.5] with each increase in age of 10 years (p < 0.0001). Sex and ethnicity were not different between groups. In conclusion, PLWH accept COVID-19 vaccines for both altruistic and individual reasons. With evolving recommendations and increasing numbers of booster vaccines, we must re-examine the needs of PLWH regularly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The World Health Organization has designated vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence among the most pressing issues in global health. The COVID-19 pandemic has made vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence particularly salient and urgent. The purpose of this special issue is to highlight a broad range of perspectives on these critical issues. We have included a total of 30 papers that address issues related to vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence across multiple levels of the Socio-Ecological Model. We have organized the empirical papers into the following sections: individual-level beliefs, minority health and health disparities, social media and conspiracy beliefs, and interventions. In addition to the empirical papers, three commentaries are included in this special issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our study focused on the discovery of how vaccine hesitancy is framed in Twitter discourse, allowing us to recognize at-scale all tweets that evoke any of the hesitancy framings as well as the stance of the tweet authors towards the frame. By categorizing the hesitancy framings that propagate misinformation, address issues of trust in vaccines, or highlight moral issues or civil rights, we were able to empirically recognize their ontological commitments. Ontological commitments of vaccine hesitancy framings couples with the stance of tweet authors allowed us to identify hesitancy profiles for two most controversial yet effective and underutilized vaccines for which there remains substantial reluctance among the public: the Human Papillomavirus and the COVID-19 vaccines. The discovered hesitancy profiles inform public health messaging approaches to effectively reach Twitter users with promise to shift or bolster vaccine attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vaccine confidence has emerged as one of the most relevant psychological factors implied in the worldwide affecting the fight against COVID-19—as well as public trust in doctors, medicine, and science. Indeed, the vaccine confidence is crucial to maximize the trust in vaccines and their use for prevention, with several implications for public health. This study aimed to analyse the relationships among between vaccine confidence, conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19, and satisfaction with science and medicine in handling the COVID-19 pandemic. A longitudinal observational survey was administered to a convenience sample (n = 544; mean age 52.76 y.o., SD = 15.11; females 46.69%) from the Italian general population. A two-waves mediation model—a structural equation model technique—was used. The survey was part of a larger international project (https://osf.io/qy65b/). The model highlighted that the conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 had a negative effect on the satisfaction with medicine and science (β = − 0.13, se = 0.03, p <.001). The latter, in turn, had a positive effect on vaccine confidence (β = 0.10, se =.05, p <.001). Interestingly, the effect of conspiracy beliefs on vaccine confidence was completely mediated by the scientifical-medical satisfaction (β = − 0.02, se = 0.01, p <.05). These results highlight how the scientifical-medical satisfaction can fully mediate the relationship between conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 and vaccine confidence. These findings about vaccine hesitancy and confidence and disclose have implications for psychological and social interventions that could promote vaccine confidence by targeting the satisfaction with science and medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Extensive media coverage and potential controversy about COVID-19 vaccination during the pandemic may have affected people's general attitudes towards vaccination. We sought to describe key psychological antecedents related to vaccination and assess how these vary temporally in relationship to the pandemic and availability of COVID-19 vaccination. As part of an ongoing online study, we recruited a national (U.S.) sample of young gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (N = 1,227) between October 2019 and June 2021, and assessed the "4Cs" (antecedents of vaccination; range = 1–5). Overall, men had high levels of confidence (trust in vaccines; M = 4.13), calculation (deliberation; M = 3.97) and collective responsibility (protecting others; M = 4.05) and low levels of complacency (not perceiving disease risk; M = 1.72). In multivariable analyses, confidence and collective responsibility varied relative to the pandemic phase/vaccine availability, reflecting greater hesitancy during later stages of the pandemic. Antecedents also varied by demographic characteristics. Findings suggest negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on key antecedents of general vaccination and identify potential targets for interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study was to assess the influence of workplace safety conditions alongside the World Health Organization's model of the "3 Cs", on grocery store workers' vaccine hesitancy concerning COVID-19. Data for this study come from the Arizona Frontline Workers Survey, a longitudin web-based survey of 770 grocery store workers in the state of Arizona (US) collected in July 2020 and January 2021. We utilized ordinary least squares and multinomial logistic regression analyses to assess predictors of hesitancy at our Wave 2. Thirty-nine percent of our sample reported being unlikely to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Two aspects of the "3 Cs" model, confidence and convenience, were correlated with lower levels of vaccine hesitancy while the perceptions of being protected by one's employer increased hesitancy. Our findings underscore the importance of workplace conditions for vaccine hesitancy and the need to include vaccine messaging in employers' safety practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the development of multiple effective vaccines, reducing the global morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 will depend on the distribution and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination. Estimates of global vaccine acceptance among pregnant women and mothers of young children are yet unknown. An understanding of the challenges and correlates to vaccine acceptance will aid the acceleration of vaccine administration within these populations. Acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women and mothers of children younger than 18-years-old, as well as potential predictors, were assessed through an online survey, administered by Pregistry between October 28 and November 18, 2020. 17,871 total survey responses from 16 countries were obtained. Given a 90% COVID-19 vaccine efficacy, 52.0% of pregnant women (n = 2747/5282) and 73.4% of non-pregnant women (n = 9214/12,562) indicated an intention to receive the vaccine. 69.2% of women (n = 11,800/17,054), both pregnant and non-pregnant, indicated an intention to vaccinate their children. Vaccine acceptance was generally highest in India, the Philippines, and all sampled countries in Latin America; it was lowest in Russia, the United States and Australia. The strongest predictors of vaccine acceptance included confidence in vaccine safety or effectiveness, worrying about COVID-19, belief in the importance of vaccines to their own country, compliance to mask guidelines, trust of public health agencies/health science, as well as attitudes towards routine vaccines. COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and its predictors among women vary globally. Vaccination campaigns for women and children should be specific for each country in order to attain the largest impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vaccines have contributed substantially to decreasing the morbidity and mortality rates of many infectious diseases worldwide. Despite this achievement, an increasing number of parents have adopted hesitant behaviours towards vaccines, delaying or even refusing their administration to children. This has implications not only on individuals but also society in the form of outbreaks for e.g. measles, chicken pox, hepatitis A, etc. A review of the literature was conducted to identify the determinants of vaccine hesitancy (VH) as well as vaccine confidence and link them to challenges and opportunities associated with vaccination in India, safety concerns, doubts about the need for vaccines against uncommon diseases and suspicions towards new vaccines were identified as major vaccine-specific factors of VH. Lack of awareness and limited access to vaccination sites were often reported by hesitant parents. Lastly, socio-economic level, educational level and cultural specificities were contextual factors of VH in India. Controversies and rumours around some vaccines (e.g., human papillomavirus) have profoundly impacted the perception of the risks and benefits of vaccination. Challenges posed by traditions and cultural behaviours, geographical specificities, socio-demographic disparities, the healthcare system and vaccine-specific features are highlighted, and opportunities to improve confidence are identified. To overcome VH and promote vaccination, emphasis should be on improving communication, educating the new generation and creating awareness among the society. Tailoring immunisation programmes as per the needs of specific geographical areas or communities is also important to improve vaccine confidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the early months of the COVID-19 epidemic, some have wondered if the force of this global experience will solve the problem of vaccine refusal that has vexed and preoccupied the global public health community for the last several decades. Drawing on historical and epidemiological analyses, we critique contemporary approaches to reducing vaccine hesitancy and articulate our notion of vaccine confidence as an expanded way of conceptualizing the problem and how to respond to it. Intervening on the rush of vaccine optimism we see pervading present discourse around the COVID-19 epidemic, we call for a re-imagination of the culture of public health and the meaning of vaccine safety regulations. Public confidence in vaccination programs depends on the work they do for the community—social, political, and moral as well as biological. The concept of public health and its programs must be broader than the delivery of the vaccine technology itself. The narrative work and policy actions entailed in actualizing such changes will, we expect, be essential in achieving a true vaccine confidence, however the public reacts to the specific vaccine that may be developed for COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: Europe has experienced a major resurgence of measles in recent years, despite the availability and free access to a safe, effective, and affordable vaccination measles, mumps and rubella vaccine (MMR). The main driver for this is suboptimal vaccine coverage. Parental attitudes and beliefs toward measles vaccination are of paramount importance in influencing vaccine coverage. The three objectives of this study are to synthesize and critically assess parental attitudes and beliefs toward MMR uptake, to develop strategies and policy recommendations to effectively improve MMR vaccine uptake accordingly, and ultimately to identify areas for further research. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using primary studies from PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Scopus published between 2011 and April 2019. Inclusion criteria comprised primary studies in English conducted in Europe and studying parental attitudes and behavior regarding MMR uptake. Data were extracted using an inductive grounded theory approach. Results: In all, 20 high-quality studies were identified. Vaccine hesitancy or refusal were mainly due to concerns about vaccine safety, effectiveness, perception of measles risk and burden, mistrust in experts, and accessibility. Factors for MMR uptake included a sense of responsibility toward child and community health, peer judgement, trust in experts and vaccine, and measles severity. Anthroposophical and Gypsy, Roma, and Traveler populations presented unique barriers such as accessibility. Conclusion: A multi-interventional, evidence-based approach is vital to improve confidence, competence, and convenience of measles vaccination uptake. Healthcare professionals need an understanding of individual contextual attitudes and barriers to MMR uptake to tailor effective communication. Effective surveillance is needed to identify under-vaccinated populations for vaccination outreach programs to improve accessibility and uptake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Assured quality vaccines and safe immunization practices are pre-requisite to successful immunization programs. All vaccines go through stringent safety checks during pre-licensure stage. Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI) Surveillance program is an integral part of routine immunization program in India to monitor the vaccine safety in the post licensure phase. Indian AEFI Program: National AEFI surveillance relies on passive surveillance and reporting by the health functionaries and practitioners. Vigorous strengthening of AEFI surveillance has resulted in manifold rise in absolute number of AEFI reports across several reporting units in the country in the last decade. Establishment of National AEFI Secretariat, National Technical Collaborating Centre, and development of risk communication strategy as well as quality management certification are some of the unique aspects of this public health program. All serious AEFI reports undergo a systematic causality assessment as per WHO-algorithm by trained committees. National AEFI surveillance system has forged formal linkages with national pharmacovigilance program, the regulators, and professional bodies. Challenges: The number of the reported serious AEFIs are still far less than the expected numbers. Although the AEFI committees at the district and state levels have been established, a large proportion are far from functional. Way forward: As the national immunization program introduces newer vaccines for different age groups and coverage improves, the issues of vaccine hesitancy and confidence are likely to be raised more often and the AEFI surveillance program will have to assume greater responsibility to comprehensively respond to the community concerns and sustain public confidence in vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]