How do psychobehavioural variables shed light on heterogeneity in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance? Evidence from United States general population surveys on a probability panel and social media.

OBJECTIVES: To (1) understand what behaviours, beliefs, demographics and structural factors predict US adults' intention to get a COVID-19 vaccination, (2) identify segments of the population ('personas') who share similar factors predicting vaccination intention, (3) create a 'typing tool' to predict which persona people belong to and (4) track changes in the distribution of personas over time and across the USA. DESIGN: Three surveys: two on a probability-based household panel (NORC's AmeriSpeak) and one on Facebook. SETTING: The first two surveys were conducted in January 2021 and March 2021 when the COVID-19 vaccine had just been made available in the USA. The Facebook survey ran from May 2021 to February 2022. PARTICIPANTS: All participants were aged 18+ and living in the USA. OUTCOME MEASURES: In our predictive model, the outcome variable was self-reported vaccination intention (0-10 scale). In our typing tool model, the outcome variable was the five personas identified by our clustering algorithm. RESULTS: Only 1% of variation in vaccination intention was explained by demographics, with about 70% explained by psychobehavioural factors. We identified five personas with distinct psychobehavioural profiles: COVID Sceptics (believe at least two COVID-19 conspiracy theories), System Distrusters (believe people of their race/ethnicity do not receive fair healthcare treatment), Cost Anxious (concerns about time and finances), Watchful (prefer to wait and see) and Enthusiasts (want to get vaccinated as soon as possible). The distribution of personas varies at the state level. Over time, we saw an increase in the proportion of personas who are less willing to get vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: Psychobehavioural segmentation allows us to identify why people are unvaccinated, not just who is unvaccinated. It can help practitioners tailor the right intervention to the right person at the right time to optimally influence behaviour.

Facilitating Real-Time, Multidirectional Learning for Clinicians in a Low-Evidence Pandemic Response.

As COVID-19 was declared a health emergency in March 2020, there was immense demand for information about the novel pathogen. This paper examines the clinician-reported impact of Project ECHO COVID-19 Clinical Rounds on clinician learning. Primary sources of study data were Continuing Medical Education (CME) Surveys for each session from the dates of March 24, 2020 to July 30, 2020 and impact surveys conducted in November 2020, which sought to understand participants' overall assessment of sessions. Quantitative analyses included descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney testing. Qualitative data were analyzed through inductive thematic analysis. Clinicians rated their knowledge after each session as significantly higher than before that session. 75.8% of clinicians reported they would 'definitely' or 'probably' use content gleaned from each attended session and clinicians reported specific clinical and operational changes made as a direct result of sessions. 94.6% of respondents reported that COVID-19 Clinical Rounds helped them provide better care to patients. 89% of respondents indicated they 'strongly agree' that they would join ECHO calls again.COVID-19 Clinical Rounds offers a promising model for the establishment of dynamic peer-to-peer tele-mentoring communities for low or no-notice response where scientifically tested or clinically verified practice evidence is limited.