Predicting missed health care visits during the COVID-19 pandemic using machine learning methods: evidence from 55,500 individuals from 28 European countries.

BACKGROUND: Pandemics such as the COVID-19 pandemic and other severe health care disruptions endanger individuals to miss essential care. Machine learning models that predict which patients are at greatest risk of missing care visits can help health administrators prioritize retentions efforts towards patients with the most need. Such approaches may be especially useful for efficiently targeting interventions for health systems overburdened during states of emergency. METHODS: We use data on missed health care visits from over 55,500 respondents of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) COVID-19 surveys (June - August 2020 and June - August 2021) with longitudinal data from waves 1-8 (April 2004 - March 2020). We compare the performance of four machine learning algorithms (stepwise selection, lasso, random forest, and neural networks) to predict missed health care visits during the first COVID-19 survey based on common patient characteristics available to most health care providers. We test the prediction accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the selected models for the first COVID-19 survey by employing 5-fold cross-validation, and test the out-of-sample performance of the models by applying them to the data from the second COVID-19 survey. RESULTS: Within our sample, 15.5% of the respondents reported any missed essential health care visit due to the COVID-19 pandemic. All four machine learning methods perform similarly in their predictive power. All models have an area under the curve (AUC) of around 0.61, outperforming random prediction. This performance is sustained for data from the second COVID-19 wave one year later, with an AUC of 0.59 for men and 0.61 for women. When classifying all men (women) with a predicted risk of 0.135 (0.170) or higher as being at risk of missing care, the neural network model correctly identifies 59% (58%) of the individuals with missed care visits, and 57% (58%) of the individuals without missed care visits. As the sensitivity and specificity of the models are strongly related to the risk threshold used to classify individuals, the models can be calibrated depending on users' resource constraints and targeting approach. CONCLUSIONS: Pandemics such as COVID-19 require rapid and efficient responses to reduce disruptions in health care. Based on characteristics available to health administrators or insurance providers, simple machine learning algorithms can be used to efficiently target efforts to reduce missed essential care.

An Entertainment-Education Video and Written Messages to Alleviate Loneliness in Germany: Pilot Randomized Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: More than half of adults in Germany have felt lonely during the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous studies highlight the importance of boosting positive emotions and social connectedness to combat loneliness. However, interventions targeting these protective psychosocial resources remain largely untested. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aim to test the feasibility of a short animated storytelling video, written messages boosting social connectedness, and a combination of both for alleviating loneliness. METHODS: We enrolled 252 participants who were 18 years or older and spoke fluent German. Participants were recruited from a previous study on loneliness in Germany. We measured the effects of a combination of an animated video and written messages (intervention A), an animated video (intervention B), and written messages (intervention C) on loneliness, self-esteem, self-efficacy, and hope. We compared these with a control arm, which did not receive any intervention. The animated video was developed by Stanford University School of Medicine to reflect experiences of social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic and convey messages of hope and solidarity. The written messages communicate four findings from recent studies on loneliness in Germany: (1) over a period of 6 months, 66% of respondents in Germany reported feeling lonely (feelings of loneliness are surprisingly common); (2) physical activity can ease feelings of loneliness; (3) focusing on "what really matters" in one's life can help to ease feelings of loneliness; and (4) turning to friends for companionship and support can ease feelings of loneliness. Participants were randomized 1:1:1:1 to interventions A, B, C, and the control condition, using the randomization feature of the web-based platform "Unipark," on which our trial takes place. Both the study investigators and analysts were blinded to the trial assignments. The primary outcome, loneliness, was measured using the short-form UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8). Our secondary outcomes included the scores of the Coping with Loneliness Questionnaire, the 10-item Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSE), the 10-item General Self-Efficacy Scale, and the 12-item Adult Hope Scale (AHS). RESULTS: We observed no statistically significant effect of the tested interventions on loneliness scores, controlling for the baseline loneliness score before an intervention (all P values >.11). However, we observed significantly greater intention to cope with loneliness after exposure to an animated video when compared with the control (ß=4.14; t248=1.74; 1-tailed P=.04). CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide meaningful evidence for the feasibility of a full-scale study. Our study sheds light on the intention to cope with loneliness and explores the potential for creative digital interventions to enhance this psychological precursor, which is integral to overcoming loneliness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00027116; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00027116.

Two-factor factorial randomized multi-arm parallel controlled trial of four SARS-CoV-2 surveillance strategies in representative population sample points.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is characterized by a constant risk of a rapid increase in infection burden due to the emergence of new variants with higher transmissibility and immune escape. Monitoring the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has so far mainly relied on passive surveillance, which yields biased epidemiological measures due to the disproportionate number of undetected asymptomatic cases. In contrast, active surveillance could provide more accurate estimates of the true SARS-CoV-2 prevalence that help to forecast the evolution of the pandemic, enabling evidence-based decision-making. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare four different approaches of active SARS-CoV-2 surveillance, focusing on feasibility and epidemiological outcomes. METHODS: The randomized, two-factor factorial, multi-arm parallel trial was conducted in 2020 in a German district with 700,000 inhabitants. The epidemiological outcome comprised the SARS-CoV-2 prevalence and its precision. The four study arms combined two factors: i) individuals versus households, ii) direct testing versus testing conditioned on symptom pre-screening. Individuals seven years and older were eligible. Altogether, 27,908 addresses from general population representative samples of 51 municipalities were randomly allocated to the arms and 15 consecutive recruitment weekdays. Data collection and logistics were highly digitized, a website in five languages enabled low-barrier registration and tracking of results. Gargle sample collection kits were sent by post. Participants collected a gargle sample at home and mailed it to the laboratory. Samples were analyzed with RT-LAMP, positive/weak results were confirmed with RT-qPCR. RESULTS: Recruitment took place between 18 November and 11 December 2020. The response rates in the four arms varied between 34% and 41%. The pre-screening classified 17% as COVID-19 symptomatic. Altogether, 4,232 persons without pre-screening and 7,623 participating in the pre-screening provided 5,351 gargle samples, of which 5,319 (99%) could be analyzed, yielding 17 confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and a combined prevalence of 0.36% (95% CI [0.14%; 0.59%]) in the arms without, respectively 0.05% (95% CI [0.00%; 0.108%]) with pre-screening (initial contacts only). In more detail, we found a prevalence of 0.31% (95% CI [0.06; 0.58]), respectively 0.35% (95% CI [0.09; 0.6], household members included), and lower estimates with pre-screening (0.07% (95% CI [0.0; 0.15], respectively with household members 0.02 (95% CI [0.0; 0.06]). Asymptomatic infections occurred in 3/11 positive cases with symptom data. The two arms without pre-screening performed best regarding effectiveness and accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown that the combination of postal mailing of gargle sample kits as well as returning home-based self-collected liquid gargle samples and a subsequent analysis with high-sensitivity RT-LAMP is generally a feasible way to conduct active SARS-CoV-2 population surveillance without burdening routine diagnostic testing. Efforts to improve participation rates and to facilitate integration into the public health system may increase the potential to effectively monitor the course of the pandemic. CLINICALTRIAL: The trial was registered (30 November 2020) at the German Clinical Trials Register, registration number DRKS00023271. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT: RR2-10.1186/s13063-021-05619-5.

Calculation, knowledge, and identity: Dimensions of trust when making COVID-19 vaccination choices in China.

Vaccine hesitancy threatens the response to the COVID-19 pandemic and to other infectious disease outbreaks globally. Fostering trust has been highlighted as a critical factor in addressing vaccine hesitancy and expanding vaccine coverage, but qualitative exploration of trust in the context of vaccination remains limited. We contribute to filling this gap by providing a comprehensive qualitative analysis of trust in the context of COVID-19 vaccination in China. We conducted 40 in-depth interviews with Chinese adults in December 2020. During data collection, trust emerged as a highly salient topic. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, translated into English, and analyzed with a combination of inductive and deductive coding. Following established trust literature, we differentiate between three types of trust - calculation-based trust, knowledge-based trust, and identity-based trust - which we grouped across components of the health system, as informed by the WHO's building blocks. Our results highlight how participants attributed their level of trust in COVID-19 vaccines to their trust in the medical technology itself (based on assessing risks and benefits or previous vaccination experiences), the service delivery and health workforce (informed by past experiences with health providers and their role throughout the pandemic), and leadership and governance (drawing on notions of government performance and patriotism). Reducing negative impact from past vaccine controversies, increasing the credibility of pharmaceutical companies, and fostering clear communication are identified as important channels for facilitating trust. Our findings emphasize a strong need for comprehensive information on COVID-19 vaccines and increased promotion of vaccination by credible figures.

Early-stage predictors of deterioration among 3145 nonsevere SARS-CoV-2-infected people community-isolated in Wuhan, China: A combination of machine learning algorithms and competing risk survival analyses.

OBJECTIVE: To determine which early-stage variables best predicted the deterioration of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among community-isolated people infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and to test the performance of prediction using only inexpensive-to-measure variables. METHODS: Medical records of 3145 people isolated in two Fangcang shelter hospitals (large-scale community isolation centers) from February to March 2020 were accessed. Two complementary methods-machine learning algorithms and competing risk survival analyses-were used to test potential predictors, including age, gender, severity upon admission, symptoms (general symptoms, respiratory symptoms, and gastrointestinal symptoms), computed tomography (CT) signs, and comorbid chronic diseases. All variables were measured upon (or shortly after) admission. The outcome was deterioration versus recovery of COVID-19. RESULTS: More than a quarter of the 3145 people did not present any symptoms, while one-third ended isolation due to deterioration. Machine learning models identified moderate severity upon admission, old age, and CT ground-glass opacity as the most important predictors of deterioration. Removing CT signs did not degrade the performance of models. Competing risk models identified age ≥ 35 years, male gender, moderate severity upon admission, cough, expectoration, CT patchy opacity, CT consolidation, comorbid diabetes, and comorbid cardiovascular or cerebrovascular diseases as significant predictors of deterioration, while a stuffy or runny nose as a predictor of recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Early-stage prediction of COVID-19 deterioration can be made with inexpensive-to-measure variables, such as demographic characteristics, severity upon admission, observable symptoms, and self-reported comorbid diseases, among asymptomatic people and mildly to moderately symptomatic patients.

Strengthening primary care for diabetes and hypertension in Eswatini: study protocol for a nationwide cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes and hypertension are increasingly important population health challenges in Eswatini. Prior to this project, healthcare for these conditions was primarily provided through physician-led teams at tertiary care facilities and accessed by only a small fraction of people living with diabetes or hypertension. This trial tests and evaluates two community-based healthcare service models implemented at the national level, which involve health care personnel at primary care facilities and utilize the country's public sector community health worker cadre (the rural health motivators [RHMs]) to help generate demand for care. METHODS: This study is a cluster-randomized controlled trial with two treatment arms and one control arm. The unit of randomization is a primary healthcare facility along with all RHMs (and their corresponding service areas) assigned to the facility. A total of 84 primary healthcare facilities were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to the three study arms. The first treatment arm implements differentiated service delivery (DSD) models at the clinic and community levels with the objective of improving treatment uptake and adherence among clients with diabetes or hypertension. In the second treatment arm, community distribution points (CDPs), which previously targeted clients living with human immunodeficiency virus, extend their services to clients with diabetes or hypertension by allowing them to pick up medications and obtain routine nurse-led follow-up visits in their community rather than at the healthcare facility. In both treatment arms, RHMs visit households regularly, screen clients at risk, provide personalized counseling, and refer clients to either primary care clinics or the nearest CDP. In the control arm, primary care clinics provide diabetes and hypertension care services but without the involvement of RHMs and the implementation of DSD models or CDPs. The primary endpoints are mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and systolic blood pressure among adults aged 40 years and older living with diabetes or hypertension, respectively. These endpoints will be assessed through a household survey in the RHM service areas. In addition to the health impact evaluation, we will conduct studies on cost-effectiveness, syndemics, and the intervention's implementation processes. DISCUSSION: This study has the ambition to assist the Eswatini government in selecting the most effective delivery model for diabetes and hypertension care. The evidence generated with this national-level cluster-randomized controlled trial may also prove useful to policy makers in the wider Sub-Saharan African region. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04183413. Trial registration date: December 3, 2019.

Kopfkino: Phases of quarantine among asymptomatic SARS-COV-2 carriers in Germany.

Although a majority of SARS-COV-2 diagnosis are asymptomatic, presymptimatic or minimally symptomatic, little has been described and understood about the illness careers of these individuals. This study explored the lived experience of a SARS-COV-2 diagnosis and subsequent quarantine among individuals in Germany who were diagnosed with SARS-COV-2 during the second wave of the pandemic (late 2020-early 2021), but whose diagnosis was unexpected due to a lack of a known contact, or the asymptomatic nature of their case at the time of diagnosis. In-depth interviews (n â€‹= â€‹22) were conducted by phone or video call, audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Routine debriefings guided data collection and facilitated analysis, which followed a framework approach. Regardless of age, gender or socioeconomic status, data consistently demonstrated a diagnosis and quarantine career marked by five emotional phases: overconfidence, shock and denial, coming to grips and asking questions, enduring, and cautious optimism as quarantine ended. These experiences suggest that providing trustworthy, easily accessible information regarding certain key aspects of the post diagnosis and quarantine period could benefit patients in terms of reducing stress, understanding the consequences of a diagnosis and mitigating foreseeable challenges in terms of personal, logistical and emotional issues. Follow-up research with providers and public health bureaus could inform how to best tailor such messaging for clients who experience an unexpected diagnosis.

From disgusting and complicated to simple and brilliant: Implementation perspectives and lessons learned from users and rejectors of mail-in SARS-CoV-2 gargle tests.

Background: Despite the important role of testing as a measure against the COVID-19 pandemic, user perspectives on SARS-CoV-2 tests remain scarce, inhibiting an improvement of testing approaches. As the world enters the third year of the pandemic, more nuanced perspectives of testing, and opportunities to expand testing in a feasible and affordable manner merit consideration. Methods: Conducted amid the second pandemic wave (late 2020-early 2021) during and after a multi-arm trial evaluating SARS-CoV-2 surveillance strategies in the federal state Baden-Württemberg, Germany, this qualitative sub-study aimed to gain a deeper understanding of how test users and test rejectors perceived mail-in SARS-CoV-2 gargle tests. We conducted 67 semi-structured in-depth interviews (mean duration: 60 min) via telephone or video call. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed inductively using thematic analysis. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided the findings' presentation. Results: Respondents generally described gargle sampling as simple and comfortable. However, individual perceptions of the testing method and its feasibility varied widely from disgusting and complicated to simple and brilliant. Self-sampling was appreciated for lowering infection risks during testing, but also considered more complex. Gargle-sampling increased participants' self-efficacy to sample correctly. Communication (first contact, quantity and content of information, reminders, support system) and trust (in the study, its institutional affiliation and test method) decisively influenced the intervention's acceptability. Conclusion: User-driven insights on how to streamline testing include: consider communication, first impressions of tests and information as key for successful mail-in testing; pay attention to the role of mutual trust between those taking and administering tests; implement gargle self-sampling as a pleasant alternative to swab testing; offer multiple test methods to increase test up-take.

Limitations introduced by a low participation rate of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence data.

BACKGROUND: There has been a large influx of COVID-19 seroprevalence studies, but comparability between the seroprevalence estimates has been an issue because of heterogeneities in testing platforms and study methodology. One potential source of heterogeneity is the response or participation rate. METHODS: We conducted a review of participation rates (PR) in SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies collected by SeroTracker and examined their effect on the validity of study conclusions. PR was calculated as the count of participants for whom the investigators had collected a valid sample, divided by the number of people invited to participate in the study. A multivariable beta generalized linear model with logit link was fitted to determine if the PR of international household and community-based seroprevalence studies was associated with the factors of interest, from 1 December 2019 to 10 March 2021. RESULTS: We identified 90 papers based on screening and were able to calculate the PR for 35 out of 90 papers (39%), with a median PR of 70% and an interquartile range of 40.92; 61% of the studies did not report PR. CONCLUSIONS: Many SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies do not report PR. It is unclear what the median PR rate would be had a larger portion not had limitations in reporting. Low participation rates indicate limited representativeness of results. Non-probabilistic sampling frames were associated with higher participation rates but may be less representative. Standardized definitions of participation rate and data reporting necessary for the PR calculations are essential for understanding the representativeness of seroprevalence estimates in the population of interest.

From disgusting and complicated to simple and brilliant: Implementation perspectives and lessons learned from users and rejectors of mail-in SARS-CoV-2 gargle tests

Background Despite the important role of testing as a measure against the COVID-19 pandemic, user perspectives on SARS-CoV-2 tests remain scarce, inhibiting an improvement of testing approaches. As the world enters the third year of the pandemic, more nuanced perspectives of testing, and opportunities to expand testing in a feasible and affordable manner merit consideration. Methods Conducted amid the second pandemic wave (late 2020–early 2021) during and after a multi-arm trial evaluating SARS-CoV-2 surveillance strategies in the federal state Baden-Württemberg, Germany, this qualitative sub-study aimed to gain a deeper understanding of how test users and test rejectors perceived mail-in SARS-CoV-2 gargle tests. We conducted 67 semi-structured in-depth interviews (mean duration: 60 min) via telephone or video call. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed inductively using thematic analysis. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided the findings' presentation. Results Respondents generally described gargle sampling as simple and comfortable. However, individual perceptions of the testing method and its feasibility varied widely from disgusting and complicated to simple and brilliant. Self-sampling was appreciated for lowering infection risks during testing, but also considered more complex. Gargle-sampling increased participants' self-efficacy to sample correctly. Communication (first contact, quantity and content of information, reminders, support system) and trust (in the study, its institutional affiliation and test method) decisively influenced the intervention's acceptability. Conclusion User-driven insights on how to streamline testing include: consider communication, first impressions of tests and information as key for successful mail-in testing;pay attention to the role of mutual trust between those taking and administering tests;implement gargle self-sampling as a pleasant alternative to swab testing;offer multiple test methods to increase test up-take.

Cost and cost-effectiveness of four different SARS-CoV-2 active surveillance strategies: evidence from a randomised control trial in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has entered its third year and continues to affect most countries worldwide. Active surveillance, i.e. testing individuals irrespective of symptoms, presents a promising strategy to accurately measure the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to identify the most cost-effective active surveillance strategy for COVID-19 among the four strategies tested in a randomised control trial between 18th November 2020 and 23rd December 2020 in Germany. The four strategies included: (A1) direct testing of individuals; (A2) direct testing of households; (B1) testing conditioned on upstream COVID-19 symptom pre-screening of individuals; and (B2) testing conditioned on upstream COVID-19 symptom pre-screening of households. METHODS: We adopted a health system perspective and followed an activity-based approach to costing. Resource consumption data were collected prospectively from a digital individual database, daily time records, key informant interviews and direct observations. Our cost-effectiveness analysis compared each strategy with the status quo and calculated the average cost-effective ratios (ACERs) for one primary outcome (sample tested) and three secondary outcomes (responder recruited, case detected and asymptomatic case detected). RESULTS: Our results showed that A2, with cost per sample tested at 52,89 EURO, had the lowest ACER for the primary outcome, closely followed by A1 (63,33 EURO). This estimate was much higher for both B1 (243,84 EURO) and B2 (181,06 EURO). CONCLUSION: A2 (direct testing at household level) proved to be the most cost-effective of the four evaluated strategies and should be considered as an option to strengthen the routine surveillance system in Germany and similar settings.

Deliberation, context, emotion and trust - understanding the dynamics of adults' COVID-19 vaccination decisions in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Willingness to vaccinate against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is vital to successful vaccination campaigns, is wavering and suboptimal. In Germany, quantitative research highlighted concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines as barriers to uptake, but qualitative insights regarding individuals' decisions about COVID-19 vaccines and how personal perceptions reflect or refute existing behavioral theories are lacking. METHODS: To identify how individuals make COVID-19 vaccination decisions within real-life contexts, we conducted 33 semi-structured, in-depth qualitative interviews with individuals in Germany between March and April 2021 using maximum variation sampling, focusing on perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines. Analysis, informed by a framework approach, began in the field via debriefings and was amplified upon the conclusion of data collection. RESULTS: Four interconnected themes (deliberation, context, emotion, trust) shaped respondents' decisions about vaccination. Personal deliberation regarding benefits and risks of vaccines and perceptions of the broader social and political context sparked a spectrum of emotions that underpinned vaccination decisions. Trust in science and researchers emerged as a powerful protective factor facilitating the decision to get vaccinated even amidst a rapidly changing context and disconcerting information. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings add to ongoing debates about the breadth of vaccination decisions by highlighting how respondents are influenced by their perceptions of the political context and the emotional heft of their decisions. The role of cognitive evaluation, context, and emotions mirrors other decision-making frameworks, particularly the Risk as Feelings Theory. We extend on the elements of this theory by highlighting trust as a protective factor when making decisions particularly in highly uncertain contexts. Success of vaccination campaigns, more important than ever as new variants of COVID-19 emerge, is interwoven with an ability to bolster trust in science. Communicating public-health decisions and information about vaccines transparently without instilling fear offers promising chances to strengthen public trust in COVID-19 vaccines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00024505 ).

Animated, video entertainment-education to improve vaccine confidence globally during the COVID-19 pandemic: an online randomized controlled experiment with 24,000 participants.

BACKGROUND: Science-driven storytelling and entertainment-education (E-E) media demonstrate potential for promoting improved attitudes and behavioral intent towards health-related practices. Months after the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), emerging research highlights the essential role of interventions to improve public confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine. To improve vaccine confidence, we designed three short, animated videos employing three research-informed pedagogical strategies. These can be distributed globally through social media platforms, because of their wordless and culturally accessible design. However, the effectiveness of short, animated storytelling videos, deploying various pedagogic strategies, needs to be explored across different global regions. METHODS/DESIGN: The present study is a multi-site, parallel group, randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing the effectiveness of (i) a storytelling-instructional-humor approach, (ii) a storytelling-analogy approach, (iii) a storytelling-emotion-focused approach, and (iv) no video. For our primary outcomes, we will measure vaccine hesitancy, and for secondary outcomes, we will measure behavioral intent to seek vaccination and hope. Using online platforms, we will recruit 12,000 participants (aged 18-59 years) from the USA and China, respectively, yielding a total sample size of 24,000. DISCUSSION: This trial uses innovative online technology, reliable randomization algorithms, validated survey instruments, and list experiments to establish the effectiveness of three short, animated videos employing various research-informed pedagogical strategies. Results will be used to scientifically support the broader distribution of these short, animated video as well as informing the design of future videos for rapid, global public health communication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS #00023650 . Date of registration: 2021/02/09.

The effect of a short, animated story-based video on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: A study protocol for an online randomized controlled trial.

Introduction: Exposure to a high volume of vaccine misinformation on social media can have a negative effect on vaccine confidence and rates. To counteract misinformation, we designed a collage of three short, animated story-based (SAS) videos to convey scientifically informed and accessible information about COVID-19 vaccine applicable to a social media context. Methods and analysis: We will conduct an online randomized controlled trial primarily to: (1) determine the effectiveness of SAS videos in improving COVID-19 vaccine knowledge; (2) evaluate the effectiveness of SAS videos in increasing behavioral intent for COVID-19 vaccination; and (3) quantify people's interest in watching SAS videos about the COVID-19 vaccine. We also aim to identify barriers and facilitators to COIVD-19 vaccinations that have been shown to minimize vaccine hesitancy between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Using a web-based recruitment platform, a total of 10,000 adults from the United States will be recruited and randomly assigned to (1) a SAS video collage arm, (2) an attention placebo control video arm, or (3) no intervention arm (1:1:1). Furthermore, we will measure behavioral intent to obtain information on vaccination regarding COVID-19. At the end of the trial, participants randomized to arm 2 and arm 3 will be given the option of watching one of the intervention videos voluntarily to assess participant engagement with SAS videos. Finally, we will assess individual factors associated with vaccine hesitancy - hope, optimism, COVID-19 perceived risks and benefits, self-efficacy, perceived social norms, and trust - and compare vaccinated and unvaccinated participants across the three arms. Discussions: Evidence-based information from official channels can be complex and inaccessible to the general public, whereas false information on social media is frequently shared in brief postings, images, or videos that can easily reach the general public, thereby rapidly disseminating (mis-)information. To avoid the spread of misinformation, social media may be used to deliver evidence-based and emotionally compelling information in a readily accessible format in order to pre-empt misinformation. Our findings may help inform future SAS efforts addressing COVID-19 and other important public health challenges. Ethics and dissemination: The study was approved by the Heidelberg University Hospital's Ethics Committee (S-163/2022). The trial was registered with German Clinical Trials Register (www.drks.de) on 5 January 2022: number DRKS00027938. Findings of the study will be published in peer-reviewed scientific publications and possibly presented at scientific conferences.

Effects of side-effect risk framing strategies on COVID-19 vaccine intentions: a randomized controlled trial.

Background: Fear over side-effects is one of the main drivers of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. A large literature in the behavioral and communication sciences finds that how risks are framed and presented to individuals affects their judgments of its severity. However, it remains unknown whether such framing changes can affect COVID-19 vaccine behavior and be deployed as policy solutions to reduce hesitancy. Methods: We conducted a pre-registered randomized controlled trial among 8998 participants in the United States and the United Kingdom to examine the effects of different ways of framing and presenting vaccine side-effects on individuals' willingness to get vaccinated and their perceptions of vaccine safety. Results: Adding a descriptive risk label ('very low risk') next to the numerical side-effect and providing a comparison to motor-vehicle mortality increased participants' willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine by 3.0 percentage points (p=0.003) and 2.4 percentage points (p=0.049), respectively. These effects were independent and additive and combining both framing strategies increased willingness to receive the vaccine by 6.1 percentage points (p<0.001). Mechanistically, we find evidence that these framing effects operate by increasing individuals' perceptions of how safe the vaccine is. Conclusions: Low-cost side-effect framing strategies can meaningfully affect vaccine intentions at a population level. Funding: Heidelberg Institute of Global Health. Clinical trial number: German Clinical Trials Registry (#DRKS00025551).

Vaccination is one of the main strategies for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. But vaccination rates have slowed and are below target levels in countries like the United States and the United Kingdom. While there are many causes of vaccine hesitancy, several studies have found that fear of side effects is the one of the most important. Although COVID-19 vaccine side-effects are rare, how the media presents these risks may amplify concerns. Addressing public concerns over vaccine side effects is key to improving the uptake of vaccines and booster doses, which has been even lower than primary vaccine series uptake. Studies show that how risk is presented affects people's risk perceptions and behavior. To learn more about how COVID-19 vaccine risk framing affects risk perception, Sudharsanan et al. enrolled 8,998 people from the United States and the United Kingdom in an online randomized controlled trial. Participants received information about a hypothetical new COVID-19 vaccine, including its side effect rate, and reported their perception of safety and whether they would take the vaccine. The experiments showed that adding the label "very low risk" when describing vaccine side effect rates increased the number of people who said they would take the vaccine by three percentage points. Comparing the risks of the hypothetical vaccine to the much higher chances of motor vehicle deaths increased an individual's willingness to take the vaccine by 2.4 percentage points. Combining both framing strategies increased people's desire to get vaccinated by 6.1 percentage points. Deploying these two strategies in vaccine risk communications may help increase primary and booster vaccinations against COVID-19. A next step would be to measure both vaccination intentions and vaccination rates to confirm these strategies.

Attitudes Toward the Global Allocation of Chinese COVID-19 Vaccines: Cross-sectional Online Survey of Adults Living in China.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines are in short supply worldwide. China was among the first countries to pledge supplies of the COVID-19 vaccine as a global public product, and to date, the country has provided more than 600 million vaccines to more than 200 countries and regions with low COVID-19 vaccination rates. Understanding the public's attitude in China toward the global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines could inform global and national decisions, policies, and debates. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the attitudes of adults living in China regarding the global allocation of COVID-19 vaccines developed in China and how these attitudes vary across provinces and by sociodemographic characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey among adults registered with the survey company KuRunData. The survey asked participants 31 questions about their attitudes regarding the global allocation of COVID-19 vaccines developed in China. We disaggregated responses by province and sociodemographic characteristics. All analyses used survey sampling weights. RESULTS: A total of 10,000 participants completed the questionnaire. Participants generally favored providing COVID-19 vaccines to foreign countries before fulfilling domestic needs (75.6%, 95% CI 74.6%-76.5%). Women (3778/4921, 76.8%; odds ratio 1.18, 95% CI 1.07-1.32; P=.002) and those living in rural areas (3123/4065, 76.8%; odds ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.01-1.27; P=.03) were especially likely to hold this opinion. Most respondents preferred providing financial support through international platforms rather than directly offering support to individual countries (72.1%, 95% CI 71%-73.1%), while for vaccine products they preferred direct provision to relevant countries instead of via a delivery platform such as COVAX (77.3%, 95% CI 76.3%-78.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Among our survey sample, we found that adults are generally supportive of the international distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, which may encourage policy makers to support and implement the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines developed in China worldwide. Conducting similar surveys in other countries could help align policy makers' actions on COVID-19 vaccine distribution with the preferences of their constituencies.

Hope as a predictor for COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the US: a cross-sectional survey of 11,955 adults.

Widespread vaccine uptake is critical for ending the COVID-19 pandemic. As public health officials focus on overcoming vaccine hesitancy, simultaneously boosting hope may be equally important in the US. We analyzed data from an online cross-sectional survey conducted in June 2021. Participants were 11,955 US adults (ages 18-83) of various ethnicities, living in urban and rural settings. Of these, 71.3% had some college education. Mean age was 32.3 years and 72.4% reported being vaccinated against COVID-19. Main measures were COVID-19 self-reported vaccination status (vaccine uptake), vaccine hesitancy (Adult Vaccine Hesitancy Scale), and hope (Adult Hope Scale). The US grand mean hope score fell within the low-hope range. COVID-19 vaccine uptake was positively associated with hope, even after adjusting for vaccine hesitancy, gender, age, ethnicity, income, and urban vs. rural residence. The strong relationship between hope, vaccine confidence and vaccine uptake persisted across US populations at risk for low vaccine uptake. Our mediation analysis revealed that, for every unit increase in hope, the probability of being vaccinated went up by 5% points. Of this association, 52% was not mediated by vaccine hesitancy, but rather through a direct pathway from hope to vaccine uptake. Mediation analyses of US populations at risk of low vaccine uptake revealed similar findings. Hope may play an important role in vaccine uptake by reducing vaccine hesitancy and by directly enhancing vaccine uptake. Especially in populations at risk of low vaccine uptake, vaccine interventions that boost hope may augment public health efforts to increase US vaccination rates.