Search

Background: Vaccine hesitancy is a significant threat to public health. Healthcare providers (HCPs) can address hesitancy during routine patient conversations; however, few multidisciplinary education tools exist for HCPs to learn to engage in vaccine discussion especially considering new vaccine technologies such as mRNA vaccines. The objectives of this study were to explore HCP learners' experiences with COVID-19 vaccine communication, and qualitatively evaluate an online learning module composed of virtual simulation games (VSGs) which utilize the PrOTCT Framework for HCP vaccine communication., Methods: Three virtual focus groups were conducted from December 2022 to January 2023 with Canadian healthcare learners in nursing ( N  = 6), pharmacy ( N = 9), and medicine ( N  = 7) who participated in a larger study measuring the effectiveness of the VSGs. Using a pragmatic approach, a qualitative thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo to identify themes and subthemes., Results: A total of 22 HCP learners participated in this study and three key themes were identified. Across all three disciplines, participants expressed that (1) their prior education lacked training on how to hold vaccine conversations, resulting in uncomfortable personal experiences with patients; (2) the VSGs increased their confidence in holding vaccine conversations by providing novel tools and skills; and (3) participants also provided feedback to improve the VSGs which was implemented and supported the dissemination to all HCP professions., Conclusion: Although HCPs are a trusted source of vaccine information, participants in this study felt they received little training on how to engage in challenging conversations regarding COVID-19 vaccines. The introduction of the PrOTCT Framework and presumptive statements provided novel strategies for HCP to initiate vaccine conversations, especially considering new vaccine technologies and participants appreciated the emphasis on coping strategies and resilience. It is essential that HCP are provided both opportunities to practice managing these conversations, and tools and skills to succeed at an early point in their careers to prepare them for future roles in vaccine advocacy, delivery, and promotion., Competing Interests: SH has received unrestricted research funding from Sanofi and Valneva, a medical education grant from GSK, a research consulting honorarium from Seqirus, and has been an advisory committee member for AstraZeneca, GSK, Novavax, Pfizer, Sanofi, Seqirus, and Valneva. JK has been an investigator on projects funded by GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Moderna, and Pfizer, outside the submitted work. All funds have been paid to his institution, and he has not received any personal payments. He has been an unpaid Data Safety Monitoring Board Member for a COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial. He has been an unpaid member of the Canadian COVID-19 Immunity Task Force (Leadership Group member, Field Studies Working Party Co-Chair and Pediatric Network Lead), and of the Alberta Advisory Committee on Immunizations. CC has been an investigator on projects funded by GlaxoSmithKline, Merck and Pfizer. She has also contributed to continuing medical education initiatives (by producing and delivering vaccine related education materials) supported by pharmaceutical companies such as bioMerieux, Moderna, and Pfizer. All funds, including any honoraria have been paid to her institution (University of Calgary), and she has not received any personal payments. She has held an unpaid executive position for the organization 19 to Zero. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Doucette, Pateman, Fullerton, Lip, Houle, Kellner, Leal, MacDonald, McNeil, Davidson and Constantinescu.)

During the rapid deployment of COVID-19 vaccines in 2021, safety concerns may have led some pregnant individuals to postpone vaccination until after giving birth. This study aimed to describe temporal patterns and factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine series initiation after recent pregnancy in Ontario, Canada. Using the provincial birth registry linked with the COVID-19 vaccine database, we identified all individuals who gave birth between January 1 and December 31, 2021, and had not yet been vaccinated by the end of pregnancy, and followed them to June 30, 2022 (follow-up ranged from 6 to 18 months). We used cumulative incidence curves to describe COVID-19 vaccine initiation after pregnancy and assessed associations with sociodemographic, pregnancy-related, and health behavioral factors using Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Among 137,198 individuals who gave birth in 2021, 87,376 (63.7%) remained unvaccinated at the end of pregnancy; of these, 65.0% initiated COVID-19 vaccination by June 30, 2022. Lower maternal age (<25 vs. 30-34 y aHR: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.70-0.77), smoking during pregnancy (vs. nonsmoking aHR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.65-0.72), lower neighborhood income (lowest quintile vs. highest aHR: 0.79, 95%CI: 0.76-0.83), higher material deprivation (highest quintile vs. lowest aHR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.70-0.79), and exclusive breastfeeding (vs. other feeding aHR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.79-0.84) were associated with lower likelihood of vaccine initiation. Among unvaccinated individuals who gave birth in 2021, COVID-19 vaccine initiation after pregnancy reached 65% by June 30, 2022, suggesting persistent issues with vaccine hesitancy and/or access to vaccination in this population.

Background: Population-based COVID-19 vaccine coverage estimates among pregnant individuals are limited. We assessed temporal patterns in vaccine coverage (≥1 dose before or during pregnancy) and evaluated factors associated with vaccine series initiation (receiving dose 1 during pregnancy) in Ontario, Canada., Methods: We linked the provincial birth registry with COVID-19 vaccination records from December 14, 2020 to December 31, 2021 and assessed coverage rates among all pregnant individuals by month, age, and neighborhood sociodemographic characteristics. Among individuals who gave birth since April 2021-when pregnant people were prioritized for vaccination-we assessed associations between sociodemographic, behavioral, and pregnancy-related factors with vaccine series initiation using multivariable regression to estimate adjusted risk ratios (aRR) and risk differences (aRD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI)., Results: Among 221,190 pregnant individuals, vaccine coverage increased to 71.2% by December 2021. Gaps in coverage across categories of age and sociodemographic characteristics decreased over time, but did not disappear. Lower vaccine series initiation was associated with lower age (<25 vs. 30-34 years: aRR 0.53, 95%CI 0.51-0.56), smoking (vs. non-smoking: 0.64, 0.61-0.67), no first trimester prenatal care visit (vs. visit: 0.80, 0.77-0.84), and residing in neighborhoods with the lowest income (vs. highest: 0.69, 0.67-0.71). Vaccine series initiation was marginally higher among individuals with pre-existing medical conditions (vs. no conditions: 1.07, 1.04-1.10)., Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccine coverage among pregnant individuals remained lower than in the general population, and there was lower vaccine initiation by multiple characteristics., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: K. Wilson is CEO of CANImmunize Inc, which hosts a national digital immunization record, and is a member of the independent data safety board for the Medicago COVID-19 vaccine trial; there were no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This study's objective was to examine sociodemographic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake and vaccination intent in the Canadian provinces by identifying factors associated with vaccine uptake in seniors prioritized for vaccination at the time of the survey and vaccination intent in all adults., Data and Methods: A cross-sectional survey of Canadian adults was conducted in all provinces from mid-April to mid-May 2021. In addition to sociodemographic characteristics, respondents (n=10,678) provided information on their COVID-19 vaccination status or their intent to get vaccinated. Logistic regression models were fitted using sociodemographic factors as explanatory variables and vaccination status (unvaccinated vs at least one dose) or vaccination intent (unlikely versus likely or already vaccinated) as outcomes. To account for vaccine prioritization groups, multiple regression models were adjusted for province of residence, age, Indigenous identity and health care worker status., Results: Seniors with a lower household income (less than $60,000) and those living in smaller communities (fewer than 100,000 inhabitants) had higher odds of being unvaccinated. Among Canadian adults, the odds of being unlikely to get vaccinated were higher for males (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.3), individuals younger than 60 (AOR between 3.3 and 5.1), non-health care workers (AOR 3.3), those with less than a high school education (AOR 3.4) or a household income of less than $30,000 (AOR 2.7) and individuals who do not identify as South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Arab, Latin American, Southeast Asian, West Asian, Korean or Japanese (AOR 1.7)., Interpretation: COVID-19 vaccine uptake (80%) and vaccination intent (95%) were high among Canadians; however, relative disparities were observed among specific groups. Continued efforts targeted toward these groups are essential in reducing potential inequity in access or service provision.

Exclusion of pregnant and breastfeeding women from the pivotal randomized controlled trials for COVID-19 vaccines that led to emergency regulatory approval created gaps in data needed for vaccine policy, healthcare provider recommendations, and women's decisions about vaccination. We argue that such knowledge gaps increase potential for vaccine hesitancy and misinformation relating to the health of women and infants, and that these gaps in evidence are avoidable. Over several decades, ethical and scientific guidance, scholarship, and advocacy in favor of pregnant and breastfeeding women's participation in clinical development of vaccines has accumulated. Guidance on how to include pregnant and breastfeeding women in vaccine trials ethically and safely predates the COVID-19 pandemic but has yet to be routinely incorporated in vaccine development. We highlight the important role regulatory authorities could play in requiring that pregnant and breastfeeding women be eligible as volunteer participants in prelicensure vaccine trials for products that are expected to be used in this population. Inclusion of pregnant and breastfeeding populations in clinical trials leading to market approval or emergency use authorization should be undertaken early or concurrently at the time of trials in the general population.

Background: Studies have shown that immigrants have lower vaccination rates than the Canadian-born population. We sought to assess COVID-19 vaccine coverage and factors associated with uptake among foreign-born immigrants relative to the non-immigrant population in Alberta, Canada., Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we analysed population-based linked administrative health data from Alberta to examine vaccine coverage for 3 931 698 Albertans, of which 731 217 were immigrants. We calculated COVID-19 vaccination coverage as the proportion of eligible Albertans with a record of receiving at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine as of November 29, 2021. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the association of vaccine coverage with migration status (immigrants: four categories based on time since migration and non-immigrants) adjusting for socio-demographic variables., Results: Overall, COVID-19 vaccination coverage was 78.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 78.1%-78.3%) among immigrants and 76.0% (95% CI = 75.9%-76.0%) among non-immigrants. Coverage among immigrants differed by continent of origin, with North America, Oceania, and Europe having the lowest coverage. Although vaccine coverage was relatively uniform across neighbourhood income quintiles for immigrants, immigrants living in rural areas had lower vaccine coverage compared to non-immigrants living in rural areas. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed a significant interaction between age category and migration status. While immigrants below 50 years of age generally had significantly higher vaccine coverage compared to non-immigrants, there was some variation based on time since migration. Immigrants above 50 years of age showed significantly lower coverage compared to non-immigrants of the same age., Conclusions: Public health interventions should focus on older immigrants, immigrants living in rural areas, and immigrants from specific continental backgrounds in order to improve COVID-19 vaccination coverage., Competing Interests: Disclosure of interest: The authors completed the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form (available upon request from the corresponding author) and disclose no relevant interests., (Copyright © 2022 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.)

While there is evidence of urban/rural disparities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage, there is limited data on the influence of other place-based variables. In this cross-sectional study, we analyzed population-based linked administrative health data (publicly-funded health insurance database and province-wide immunization repository) to examine vaccination coverage for 3,945,103 residents aged 12 years and above in Alberta, Canada. We used multilevel logistic regression to examine the association of vaccination coverage with various place-based variables. Furthermore, we combined information on vaccine coverage and neighborhood level COVID-19 risk to categorize forward sortation areas (FSAs) into six categories. After 4 months of widely available COVID-19 vaccine, coverage varied widely between rural and urban areas (58% to 73%) and between geographic health authority zones (55.8% to 72.8%). Residents living in neighborhoods with lower COVID-19 disease incidence had the lowest vaccination coverage (63.2%), while coverage in higher incidence neighborhoods ranged from 68.3% to 71.9%. The multilevel logistic regression model indicated that residence in metro (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.37; 95% CI: 1.31-1.42) and urban areas (aOR 1.11; 95% CI: 1.08-1.14) was associated with higher vaccine coverage than residence in rural areas. Similarly, residence in Edmonton, Calgary, and South health zones was associated with higher vaccine coverage compared to residence in Central zone. Higher income neighborhoods reported higher vaccine coverage than the lowest-income neighborhoods, and the highest COVID-19 risk neighborhoods reported higher vaccine coverage than the lowest risk neighborhoods (aOR 1.52; 95% CI: 1.12-2.05). In the first four months of wider vaccine availability in Alberta, COVID-19 vaccine coverage varied according to various place-based characteristics. Vaccine distribution strategies need to consider place-based variables for program prioritization and delivery., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: By July 2021, Canada had received enough COVID-19 vaccines to fully vaccinate every eligible Canadian. However, despite the availability of vaccines, some eligible individuals remain unvaccinated. Differences in vaccination uptake can be driven by health inequalities which have been exacerbated and amplified by the pandemic. This study aims to assess inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake and intent in adults 18 years or older across Canada by identifying sociodemographic factors associated with non-vaccination and low vaccination intent using data drawn from the June to August 2021 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS)., Methods: The CCHS is an annual cross-sectional and nationally representative survey conducted by Statistics Canada, which collects health-related information. Since September 2020, questions about the COVID-19 pandemic are asked. Adjusted logistic regression models were fitted to examine associations between vaccination uptake or intent and sociodemographic and health related variables. Region, age, gender, level of education, Indigenous status, visible minority status, perceived health status, and having a regular healthcare provider were considered as predictors, among other factors., Results: The analysis included 9,509 respondents. The proportion of unvaccinated was 11%. Non-vaccination was associated with less than university education (aOR up to 3.5, 95% CI 2.1-6.1), living with children under 12 years old (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.4), not having a regular healthcare provider (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2), and poor self-perceived health (aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3-2.4). Only 5% of the population had low intention to get vaccinated. Being unlikely to get vaccinated was associated with the Prairies region (aOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.1), younger age groups (aOR up to 4.0, 95% CI 1.3-12.3), less than university education (aOR up to 3.8, 95% CI 1.9-7.6), not being part of a visible minority group (aOR 3.0, 95% CI 1.4-6.4), living with children under 12 years old (aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-2.9), unattached individuals (aOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1-6.1), and poor self-perceived health (aOR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3-2.9)., Conclusions: Disparities were observed in vaccination uptake and intent among various sociodemographic groups. Awareness of inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake and intent is needed to determine the vaccination barriers to address in vaccination promotion strategies., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: To assess the risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, and stillbirth after covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy., Design: Population based retrospective cohort study., Setting: Ontario, Canada, 1 May to 31 December 2021., Participants: All liveborn and stillborn infants from pregnancies conceived at least 42 weeks before the end of the study period and with gestational age ≥20 weeks or birth weight ≥500 g., Main Outcome Measures: Using Cox regression, hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for preterm birth before 37 weeks (overall and spontaneous preterm birth), very preterm birth (<32 weeks), small for gestational age at birth (<10th centile), and stillbirth. Vaccination against covid-19 was treated as a time varying exposure in the outcome specific risk window, and propensity score weighting was used to adjust hazard ratios for potential confounding., Results: Among 85 162 births, 43 099 (50.6%) occurred in individuals who received one dose or more of a covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy-42 979 (99.7%) received an mRNA vaccine. Vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with any increased risk of overall preterm birth (6.5% among vaccinated v 6.9% among unvaccinated; adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.08), spontaneous preterm birth (3.7% v 4.4%; 0.96, 0.90 to 1.03), or very preterm birth (0.59% v 0.89%; 0.80, 0.67 to 0.95). No increase was found in risk of small for gestational age at birth (9.1% v 9.2%; 0.98, 0.93 to 1.03) or stillbirth (0.25% v 0.44%; 0.65, 0.51 to 0.84). Findings were similar by trimester of vaccination, mRNA vaccine product, and number of doses received during pregnancy., Conclusion: The findings suggest that vaccination against covid-19 during pregnancy is not associated with a higher risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, or stillbirth., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at https://www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: support from the Public Health Agency of Canada through the Vaccine Surveillance Reference Group and the COVID-19 Immunity Task Force; SEH and LO were partly funded by the Norwegian Research Council. KW is chief executive officer of CANImmunize, which hosts a national digital immunisation record, and is a member of the independent data safety board for the Medicago covid-19 vaccine trial. There are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: There is limited comparative epidemiological evidence on outcomes associated with COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy; monitoring pregnancy outcomes in large populations is required., Objective: To evaluate peripartum outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy., Design, Setting, and Participants: Population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, using a birth registry linked with the provincial COVID-19 immunization database. All births between December 14, 2020, and September 30, 2021, were included., Exposures: COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, COVID-19 vaccination after pregnancy, and no vaccination., Main Outcomes and Measures: Postpartum hemorrhage, chorioamnionitis, cesarean delivery (overall and emergency cesarean delivery), admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and low newborn 5-minute Apgar score (<7). Linear and robust Poisson regression was used to generate adjusted risk differences (aRDs) and risk ratios (aRRs), respectively, comparing cumulative incidence of outcomes in those who received COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy with those vaccinated after pregnancy and those with no record of COVID-19 vaccination at any point. Inverse probability of treatment weights were used to adjust for confounding., Results: Among 97 590 individuals (mean [SD] age, 31.9 [4.9] years), 22 660 (23%) received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy (63.6% received dose 1 in the third trimester; 99.8% received an mRNA vaccine). Comparing those vaccinated during vs after pregnancy (n = 44 815), there were no significantly increased risks of postpartum hemorrhage (incidence: 3.0% vs 3.0%; aRD, -0.28 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -0.59 to 0.03]; aRR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.02]), chorioamnionitis (0.5% vs 0.5%; aRD, -0.04 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -0.17 to 0.09]; aRR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.70-1.21]), cesarean delivery (30.8% vs 32.2%; aRD, -2.73 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -3.59 to -1.88]; aRR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.89-0.95]), NICU admission (11.0% vs 13.3%; aRD, -1.89 per 100 newborns [95% CI, -2.49 to -1.30]; aRR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.80-0.90]), or low Apgar score (1.8% vs 2.0%; aRD, -0.31 per 100 newborns [95% CI, -0.56 to -0.06]; aRR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.73-0.97]). Findings were qualitatively similar when compared with individuals who did not receive COVID-19 vaccination at any point (n = 30 115)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada, COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, compared with vaccination after pregnancy and with no vaccination, was not significantly associated with increased risk of adverse peripartum outcomes. Study interpretation should consider that the vaccinations received during pregnancy were primarily mRNA vaccines administered in the second and third trimester.

Setting: In January 2021, the COVID-19 vaccine became available to First Nations, Métis, and Inuit (FNMI) over the age of 65 living in First Nations communities or Métis settlements in Alberta. In March, vaccine eligibility in Alberta expanded to include FNMI peoples of younger ages and in urban settings. The Métis Nation of Alberta (MNA) and other Indigenous organizations recognized that FNMI populations might be better served by tailored vaccine programs., Intervention: The MNA is the government for the Métis people in Alberta. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the MNA has supported its citizens, through financial and mental wellness support, access to personal protective equipment, and messaging regarding public health orders. When vaccines became available, culturally appropriate virtual vaccine information sessions were provided. In March 2021, the MNA delivered the first Métis-led COVID-19 vaccination clinic. Unique to the clinic's success was the location, online booking process, and community presence. The clinic focused on cultural safety, including the availability of Indigenous health professionals to community members, and cultural reference points throughout the clinic., Outcomes: In the first MNA clinic, over 1300 people were vaccinated. Visitors shared appreciation for the culturally specific aspects of the clinic, which contributed to increased safety and comfort., Implications: Based on the success of the first Métis-led vaccination clinic, similar services in communities with high numbers of Métis people have been approved. This innovative practice initiative could provide a model of COVID-19 vaccine service delivery that could be used to meet the needs of Métis citizens in other jurisdictions in Canada., (© 2021. The Author(s) under exclusive license to The Canadian Public Health Association.)

Background: Vaccinating children (≤17 years old) is important for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. As parents are primary decision makers for their children, we aimed to assess parents' perceptions and intentions regarding COVID-19 vaccination for their children, including for some underserved populations (e.g., newcomers, Indigenous peoples, and visible minority groups)., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional national survey of Canadian parents in December 2020, just as COVID-19 vaccines were approved for adults, to assess intention to vaccinate their children (aged 0-17 years) against COVID-19, perceptions of COVID-19 disease and vaccines, previous uptake of influenza and routine vaccines, and sociodemographic characteristics. Binomial logistic regression was used to assess the association between parents' lack of COVID-19 vaccination intention for their children and various independent variables., Results: Sixty-three percent of parents (1074/1702) intended to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. Those employed part-time (compared to full-time) had lower intention to vaccinate their children (aOR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.06-2.84), while those who spoke languages other than English, French, or Indigenous languages were less likely to have low intention (aOR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.32-0.92). Low vaccination intention was also associated with children not receiving influenza vaccine pre-pandemic (aOR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.04-2.21), parents having low intention to vaccinate themselves against COVID-19 (aOR = 9.22, 95% CI: 6.43-13.34), believing COVID-19 vaccination is unnecessary (aOR = 2.59, 95% CI: 1.72-3.91) or unsafe (aOR = 4.21, 95% CI: 2.96-5.99), and opposing COVID-19 vaccine use in children without prior testing (aOR = 3.09, 95% CI: 1.87-5.24)., Interpretation: Parents' COVID-19 vaccination intentions for their children are better predicted by previous decisions regarding influenza vaccination than routine childhood vaccines, and other perceptions of COVID-19 vaccine-related factors. Public communication should highlight the safety and necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in children to support a return to normal activities. Further research should assess actual COVID-19 vaccination uptake in children, particularly for underserved populations., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: MS has been an investigator on projects funded by GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi-Pasteur, Seqirus, Symvivo and VBI Vaccines. All funds have been paid to his institute, and he has not received any personal payments. All other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Acceptance of a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 is critical to achieving high levels of immunization. The objectives of this study were to understand mothers' SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intentions to explore reasons for and against SARS-CoV-2 vaccination., Methods: Participants from the All Our Families pregnancy longitudinal cohort whose children had reached ages 9-12 years were invited in May-June 2020 to complete a survey on the impact of COVID-19. The survey covered topics about the impact of the pandemic and included 2 specific questions on mothers' intentions to vaccinate their child against SARS-CoV-2. Current responses were linked to previously collected data, including infant vaccine uptake. Multinomial regression models were run to estimate associations between demographic factors, past vaccination status and vaccination intention. Qualitative responses regarding factors affecting decision-making were analyzed thematically., Results: The response rate was 53.8% (1321/2455). A minority of children of participants had partial or no vaccinations at age 2 ( n = 200, 15.1%). A total of 60.4% of mothers ( n = 798) intended to vaccinate their children with the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, 8.6% ( n = 113) did not intend to vaccinate and 31.0% ( n = 410) were unsure. Lower education, lower income and incomplete vaccination history were inversely associated with intention to vaccinate. Thematic analysis of qualitative responses showed 10 themes, including safety and efficacy, long-term effects and a rushed process., Interpretation: Within a cohort with historically high infant vaccination, a third of mothers remained unsure about vaccinating their children against SARS-CoV-2. Given the many uncertainties about future SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, clear communication regarding safety will be critical to ensuring vaccine uptake., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Suzanne Tough, Sheila McDonald, Erin Hetherington and Sarah Edwards report grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and from Alberta Innovates during the conduct of the study., (© 2021 CMA Joule Inc. or its licensors.)