"I Want People to Be Able to Make an Informed Choice": How Quebec naturopaths discuss vaccination in their practice.

Health care providers' recommendations can play an important role in individuals' vaccination decisions. Despite being one of the most popular complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), naturopathy is understudied in relation to vaccination decisions. We sought to address this gap through this study of vaccination perspectives of naturopathy practitioners in the province of Quebec, Canada. We conducted in-depth interviews with 30 naturopaths. Thematic analysis was conducted. Main themes were developed deductively (i.e., based on prior literature) and expanded through inductive coding of the data. Participants noted that they discuss vaccination in their practice, but only when clients asked questions or wanted advice. Naturopaths described refraining from explicitly recommending for or against vaccination. Instead, they focus on empowering their clients to make their own informed decision regarding vaccination. Most participants noted that they direct clients towards sources of information so that clients could decide for themselves, but some mentioned they discussed with clients what they considered to be risks associated with vaccination, as well as its benefits. These discussions were framed through a personalized and individual approach with clients.

From high hopes to disenchantment: A qualitative analysis of editorial cartoons on COVID-19 vaccines in Canadian newspapers.

In Canada, the first COVID-19 vaccine was approved for use in December 2020, marking the beginning of a large vaccination campaign. The campaign was not only unprecedented in terms of reach, but also with regards to the amount of information about vaccines that circulated in traditional and social media. This study's aim was to describe COVID-19 vaccine related discourses in Canada through an analysis of editorial cartoons. We collected 2172 cartoons about COVID-19 published between January 2020 and August 2022 in Canadian newspapers. These cartoons were downloaded and a first thematic analysis was conducted using the WHO-EPIWIN taxonomy (cause, illness, treatment, interventions, and information). From this, 389 cartoons related to COVID-19 vaccines were identified under the treatment category. These were subjected to a second thematic analysis to assess main themes (e.g., vaccine development, campaign progress, etc.), characters featured (e.g., politicians, public figures, public) and position with respect to vaccine (favorable, unfavorable, neutral). Six main themes emerged: Research and development of vaccines; Management of the vaccination campaign; Perceptions of and experiences with vaccination services; Measures and incentives to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake; Criticism of the unvaccinated; and Effectiveness of vaccination. Our analysis revealed a shift in attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination from high hopes to disenchantment, which may reflect some vaccine fatigue. In the future, public health authorities could face some challenges in maintaining confidence and high COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

« Gardez le vaccin au Sud » : mieux comprendre l'hésitation à la vaccination contre la COVID-19 au Nunavik

The COVID‑19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of vaccines to prevent infectious diseases, but also the issues related to vaccine acceptance among individuals and groups targeted by vaccination programs. The concept of vaccine hesitancy is now commonly used in public health spheres to refer to the fact that a portion of the population has significant doubts and concerns about vaccines that can lead to a vaccine refusal or delay. Most research on vaccine hesitancy focuses on individual knowledge, beliefs, values, attitudes, life trajectories and experiences. However, the focus on individual determinants of vaccine hesitancy can lessen the importance of broader structural and socio-cultural influences on attitudes and decisions about immunization. Based on interviews conducted in Nunavik, this article proposes to explore how organizational and historical factors, social norms, and shared values and beliefs about the etiology of COVID‑19 and the efficacy and usefulness of vaccines to prevent the virus, influence COVID‑19 vaccine hesitancy in Inuit communities.Alternate :La pandemia de la COVID‑19 evidenció la importancia de la vacunación para prevenir las enfermedades infecciosas, pero también los retos ligados a la aceptación de las vacunas entre individuos o grupos específicos. El concepto de desconfianza en la vacunación se volvió de uso común en la salud pública para referirse al hecho de que una parte de la población tiene temores importantes relacionados con la vacunación;temores que pueden llevar al rechazo o postergar la vacunación. La importancia de los conocimientos, creencias, valores, actitudes, trayectorias de vida y experiencias individuales en las investigaciones sobre la vacunación a veces puede ocultar la importancia de influencias estructurales y socioculturales más amplias sobre las actitudes y decisiones con respecto a la vacunación. A partir de entrevistas realizadas en Nunavik, este artículo se propone explorar cómo los factores organizacionales e históricos, las normas sociales, los valores y las creencias compartidas respecto a la etiología de la COVID‑19 y sobre la efectividad y el poder de las vacunas en la prevención, influyen sobre la desconfianza en la vacunación contra la COVID‑19 en las comunidades inuit.Alternate :La pandémie de la COVID‑19 a mis en évidence l'importance de la vaccination pour prévenir des maladies infectieuses, mais également les enjeux liés à l'acceptation des vaccins par les individus et groupes ciblés par les programmes. Le concept d'hésitation à la vaccination est désormais couramment utilisé en santé publique pour référer au fait qu'une partie de la population entretient des craintes importantes par rapport à la vaccination ;craintes qui peuvent mener à refuser ou à retarder la vaccination. L'accent important mis sur les connaissances, les croyances, les valeurs, les attitudes, les trajectoires de vie et les expériences individuelles dans les recherches sur la vaccination peut toutefois occulter l'importance des influences structurelles et socioculturelles plus larges sur les attitudes et décisions à l'égard de la vaccination. À partir d'entretiens menés au Nunavik, cet article propose donc d'explorer comment les facteurs organisationnels et historiques, les normes sociales, les valeurs et les croyances partagées à propos de l'étiologie de la COVID‑19 et à propos de l'efficacité et de la puissance des vaccins pour la prévenir, influent sur l'hésitation à la vaccination contre la COVID‑19 dans des communautés inuit.

Perspectives on COVID-19 vaccination and vaccine passports in a diverse urban adolescent population: a youth participatory mixed-methods study

Purpose Disparities in youth COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake have been documented in several countries, yet few studies have explored the attitudes and perceptions underlying vaccine-related decision-making among adolescent populations with unique socio-cultural, environmental, and/or structural contexts that may influence vaccine uptake. Methods This study used data from surveys and semi-structured interviews collected between January and March 2022 as part of an ongoing community-based research project in two ethnoculturally diverse, lower-income neighbourhoods of Montreal, Canada. Youth researchers designed and conducted interviews with unvaccinated adolescents and thematic analysis was employed to explore attitudes and perceptions underlying vaccine-related decisions and opinions about vaccine passports. Survey data were used to describe sociodemographic and psychological determinants of COVID-19 vaccination. Results Among 315 survey participants aged 14-17 years, most (74%) were fully vaccinated against COVID-19. Prevalence ranged from 57% among Black adolescents to 91% among South and/or Southeast Asian adolescents (34% difference, 95% CI: 20-49). Qualitative and quantitative findings highlighted several misconceptions about the safety, effectiveness, and necessity of COVID-19 vaccines and adolescents' desire for trusted sources of information to address their concerns. Vaccine passports likely increased uptake;yet adolescents were strongly resistant to the policy, and, for some, it may have fuelled distrust of government and scientific institutions. Conclusion Strategies that increase the trustworthiness of institutions and foster genuine partnership with underserved youth may improve vaccine confidence and help ensure an effective, pro-equity recovery from COVID-19.

What do adolescents think about vaccines? Systematic review of qualitative studies

Adolescence presents a key opportunity to build vaccine-related health literacy and promote vaccine confidence and uptake. Although adolescents are central to vaccination programs, their views around vaccines are frequently underrepresented in qualitative literature. We reviewed qualitative studies to systematically identify and summarize existing evidence on adolescents' own understanding of vaccines and experiences with vaccine decision-making, including self-consent when applicable. CINAHL;Embase;Ovid Medline;and Psych Info database searches were last updated on May 28, 2022. Data pertaining to general study characteristics, participant demographics, and qualitative content were extracted independently by two reviewers and analyzed using textual narrative synthesis. Out of 3559 individual records, 59 studies were included. The majority of the studies were conducted in high-income countries and 75% focused on human papilloma virus vaccines, with the remaining studies looking at COVID-19, meningococcal, hepatitis B and influenza vaccines or adolescent experiences with vaccines in general. Adolescent self-consent was explored in 7 studies. Perspectives from sexual and gender minorities were lacking across studies. Adolescents often had limited understanding of different vaccines and commonly perceived vaccine information to be directed towards their parents rather than themselves. Many adolescents felt school-based vaccine education and information available through healthcare providers were insufficient to make informed decisions about vaccines. While adolescents described obtaining vaccine information from traditional and online media, face-to-face interactions and opinions from trusted adults remained important. Adolescents generally relied on their parents for vaccine-decision making, even when self-consent was an option. A notable exception to this included marginalized adolescents who could not rely on parents for health-related advice. Qualitative literature about adolescent vaccines would be enriched by studies examining vaccines other than the HPV vaccine, studies examining adolescent vaccine programs in low and middle-income countries, and by deliberately eliciting vaccine experiences of adolescent with diverse sexual orientation and gender identities.

Examining an Altruism-Eliciting Video Intervention to Increase COVID-19 Vaccine Intentions in Younger Adults: A Qualitative Assessment Using the Realistic Evaluation Framework.

COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity wanes over time, and with the emergence of new variants, additional "booster" doses have been recommended in Canada. However, booster vaccination uptake has remained low, particularly amongst younger adults aged 18-39. A previous study by our research team found that an altruism-eliciting video increased COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Using qualitative methods, the present study aims to: (1) identify the factors that influence vaccine decision-making in Canadian younger adults; (2) understand younger adults' perceptions of an altruism-eliciting video designed to increase COVID-19 vaccine intentions; and (3) explore how the video can be improved and adapted to the current pandemic context. We conducted three focus groups online with participants who: (1) received at least one booster vaccine, (2) received the primary series without any boosters, or (3) were unvaccinated. We used deductive and inductive approaches to analyze data. Deductively, informed by the realist evaluation framework, we synthesized data around three main themes: context, mechanism, and intervention-specific suggestions. Within each main theme, we deductively created subthemes based on the health belief model (HBM). For quotes that could not be captured by these subthemes, additional themes were created inductively. We found multiple factors that could be important considerations in future messaging to increase vaccine acceptance, such as feeling empowered, fostering confidence in government and institutions, providing diverse (such as both altruism and individualism) messaging, and including concrete data (such as the prevalence of vulnerable individuals). These findings suggest targeted messaging tailored to these themes would be helpful to increase COVID-19 booster vaccination amongst younger adults.

A Personalized Avatar-Based Web Application to Help People Understand How Social Distancing Can Reduce the Spread of COVID-19: Cross-sectional, Observational, Pre-Post Study.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and the associated spread of COVID-19, many jurisdictions around the world imposed mandatory or recommended social or physical distancing. As a result, at the beginning of the pandemic, various communication materials appeared online to promote distancing. Explanations of the science underlying these mandates or recommendations were either highly technical or highly simplified. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand the effects of a dynamic visualization on distancing. Our overall aim was to help people understand the dynamics of the spread of COVID-19 in their community and the implications of their own behavior for themselves, those around them, the health care system, and society. METHODS: Using Scrum, which is an agile framework; JavaScript (Vue.js framework); and code already developed for risk communication in another context of infectious disease transmission, we rapidly developed a new personalized web application. In our application, people make avatars that represent themselves and the people around them. These avatars are integrated into a 3-minute animation illustrating an epidemiological model for COVID-19 transmission, showing the differences in transmission with and without distancing. During the animation, the narration explains the science of how distancing reduces the transmission of COVID-19 in plain language in English or French. The application offers full captions to complement the narration and a descriptive transcript for people using screen readers. We used Google Analytics to collect standard usage statistics. A brief, anonymous, optional survey also collected self-reported distancing behaviors and intentions in the previous and coming weeks, respectively. We launched and disseminated the application on Twitter and Facebook on April 8, 2020, and April 9, 2020. RESULTS: After 26 days, the application received 3588 unique hits from 82 countries. The optional survey at the end of the application collected 182 responses. Among this small subsample of users, survey respondents were nearly (170/177, 96%) already practicing distancing and indicated that they intended to practice distancing in the coming week (172/177, 97.2%). Among the small minority of people (n=7) who indicated that they had not been previously practicing distancing, 2 (29%) reported that they would practice distancing in the week to come. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a web application to help people understand the relationship between individual-level behavior and population-level effects in the context of an infectious disease spread. This study also demonstrates how agile development can be used to quickly create personalized risk messages for public health issues like a pandemic. The nonrandomized design of this rapid study prevents us from concluding the application's effectiveness; however, results thus far suggest that avatar-based visualizations may help people understand their role in infectious disease transmission.

The CONFIDENT study protocol: a randomized controlled trial comparing two methods to increase long-term care worker confidence in the COVID-19 vaccines.

BACKGROUND: Clinical and real-world effectiveness data for the COVID-19 vaccines have shown that they are the best defense in preventing severe illness and death throughout the pandemic. However, in the US, some groups remain more hesitant than others about receiving COVID-19 vaccines. One important group is long-term care workers (LTCWs), especially because they risk infecting the vulnerable and clinically complex populations they serve. There is a lack of research about how best to increase vaccine confidence, especially in frontline LTCWs and healthcare staff. Our aims are to: (1) compare the impact of two interventions delivered online to enhanced usual practice on LTCW COVID-19 vaccine confidence and other pre-specified secondary outcomes, (2) determine if LTCWs' characteristics and other factors mediate and moderate the interventions' effect on study outcomes, and (3) explore the implementation characteristics, contexts, and processes needed to sustain a wider use of the interventions. METHODS: We will conduct a three-arm randomized controlled effectiveness-implementation hybrid (type 2) trial, with randomization at the participant level. Arm 1 is a dialogue-based webinar intervention facilitated by a LTCW and a medical expert and guided by an evidence-based COVID-19 vaccine decision tool. Arm 2 is a curated social media web application intervention featuring interactive, dynamic content about COVID-19 and relevant vaccines. Arm 3 is enhanced usual practice, which directs participants to online public health information about COVID-19 vaccines. Participants will be recruited via online posts and advertisements, email invitations, and in-person visits to care settings. Trial data will be collected at four time points using online surveys. The primary outcome is COVID-19 vaccine confidence. Secondary outcomes include vaccine uptake, vaccine and booster intent for those unvaccinated, likelihood of recommending vaccination (both initial series and booster), feeling informed about the vaccines, identification of vaccine information and misinformation, and trust in COVID-19 vaccine information provided by different people and organizations. Exploration of intervention implementation will involve interviews with study participants and other stakeholders, an in-depth process evaluation, and testing during a subsequent sustainability phase. DISCUSSION: Study findings will contribute new knowledge about how to increase COVID-19 vaccine confidence and effective informational modalities for LTCWs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05168800 at ClinicalTrials.gov, registered December 23, 2021.

Measuring psychosocial determinants of vaccination behavior in healthcare professionals: validation of the Pro-VC-Be short-form questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine confidence among health care professionals (HCPs) is a key determinant of vaccination behaviors. We validate a short-form version of the 31-item Pro-VC-Be (Health Professionals Vaccine Confidence and Behaviors) questionnaire that measures HCPs' confidence in and commitment to vaccination. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey among 2,696 HCPs established a long-form tool to measure 10 dimensions of psychosocial determinants of vaccination behaviors. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models tested the construct validity of 69,984 combinations of items in a 10-item short form tool. The criterion validity of this tool was tested with four behavioral and attitudinal outcomes using weighted modified Poisson regressions. An immunization resource score was constructed from summing the responses of the dimensions that can influence HCPs' pro-vaccination behaviors: vaccine confidence, proactive efficacy, and trust in authorities. RESULTS: The short-form tool showed good construct validity in CFA analyses (RMSEA = 0.035 [0.024; 0.045]; CFI = 0.956; TLI = 0.918; SRMR 0.027) and comparable criterion validity to the long-form tool. The immunization resource score showed excellent criterion validity. CONCLUSIONS: The Pro-VC-Be short-form showed good construct validity and criterion validity similar to the long-form and can therefore be used to measure determinants of vaccination behaviors among HCPs.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on parents' perceptions and acceptance of routine childhood vaccination in Canada: A national longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: A decline in routine vaccination was reported by some countries early in the COVID-19 pandemic. In the context of the pandemic, determinants of routine childhood vaccination may have changed. Changes over time in parents' perceptions of routine vaccines and intentions for their children during the pandemic have not been fully explored. Understanding changes provides opportunities to promote routine childhood vaccines and address factors that may compromise parents' acceptance. METHODS: We conducted longitudinal analysis of two sequential national surveys during the pandemic (Dec 2020 and Oct/Nov 2021) to assess changes over time in Canadian parents' perceptions of routine childhood vaccines, intentions to vaccinate, access for their children ≤ 17 years, and differences among sociodemographic characteristics. McNemar-Bowker tests were used to determine changes in parents' responses collected at two time points. RESULTS: Of the 650 parents in the sample, 25.1% with a child ≤ 6 years and 20.5% with a child 7-17 years perceived that routine childhood vaccines were more important because of the pandemic. Between the two time points, parents' confidence in the safety (72.8% to 80.2%, p <.001) and effectiveness (81.7% to 85.2%, p =.007) of routine vaccines increased, parents were more engaged in vaccine decision-making (73.4% to 79.8%, p =.006), and everyday stress preventing vaccination decreased (78.8% to 68.5%, p <.001). Acceptance of routine vaccines increased (82.9% to 86.5%, p =.021), but more parents were undecided about influenza vaccination (12.6% to 20.3%, p =.002). Compared to parents with 1 child, those with 2 children reported increased vaccination acceptance (82.6% to 87.4%, p =.024). INTERPRETATION: Under the spotlight of COVID-19, parents' confidence in routine vaccines, engagement in decision-making, and vaccination acceptance increased. Vaccination providers should support parents' decision-making as they navigate routine childhood vaccine uncertainties. Differences in parents' acceptance of routine and influenza vaccines for their children highlight the need for targeted communication strategies for specific vaccines.

Sociodemographic Disparities in COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake and Vaccination Intent in Canada.

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.

Unmasking the Twitter Discourses on Masks During the COVID-19 Pandemic: User Cluster-Based BERT Topic Modeling Approach.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has spotlighted the politicization of public health issues. A public health monitoring tool must be equipped to reveal a public health measure's political context and guide better interventions. In its current form, infoveillance tends to neglect identity and interest-based users, hence being limited in exposing how public health discourse varies by different political groups. Adopting an algorithmic tool to classify users and their short social media texts might remedy that limitation. Objective: We aimed to implement a new computational framework to investigate discourses and temporal changes in topics unique to different user clusters. The framework was developed to contextualize how web-based public health discourse varies by identity and interest-based user clusters. We used masks and mask wearing during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in the English-speaking world as a case study to illustrate the application of the framework. Methods: We first clustered Twitter users based on their identities and interests as expressed through Twitter bio pages. Exploratory text network analysis reveals salient political, social, and professional identities of various user clusters. It then uses BERT Topic modeling to identify topics by the user clusters. It reveals how web-based discourse has shifted over time and varied by 4 user clusters: conservative, progressive, general public, and public health professionals. Results: This study demonstrated the importance of a priori user classification and longitudinal topical trends in understanding the political context of web-based public health discourse. The framework reveals that the political groups and the general public focused on the science of mask wearing and the partisan politics of mask policies. A populist discourse that pits citizens against elites and institutions was identified in some tweets. Politicians (such as Donald Trump) and geopolitical tensions with China were found to drive the discourse. It also shows limited participation of public health professionals compared with other users. Conclusions: We conclude by discussing the importance of a priori user classification in analyzing web-based discourse and illustrating the fit of BERT Topic modeling in identifying contextualized topics in short social media texts.

Public health community engagement with Asian populations in British Columbia during COVID-19: towards a culture-centered approach.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 has posed significant challenges to those who endeavour to provide equitable public health information and services. We examine how community leaders, advocates, and public health communication specialists have approached community engagement among Asian immigrant and diaspora communities in British Columbia throughout the pandemic. METHODS: Qualitative interviews with 27 participants working with Asian communities in a healthcare, community service, or public health setting, inductively coded and analyzed following the culture-centred approach to health communication, which focuses on intersections of structure, culture, and agency. RESULTS: Participants detailed outreach efforts aimed at those who might not be reached by conventional public health communication strategies. Pre-existing structural barriers such as poverty, racial disparities, and inequitable employment conditions were cited as complicating Asian diaspora communities' experience of the pandemic. Such disparities exacerbated the challenges of language barriers, information overload, and rapidly shifting recommendations. Participants suggested building capacity within existing community service and public health outreach infrastructures, which were understood to be too lean to meet community needs, particularly in a pandemic setting. CONCLUSION: A greater emphasis on collaboration is key to the provision of health services and information for these demographic groups. Setting priorities according to community need, in direct collaboration with community representatives, and further integrating pre-existing bonds of trust within communities into public health communication and engagement strategies would facilitate the provision of more equitable health information and services. This mode of engagement forgoes the conventional focus on individual behaviour change, and focuses instead on fostering community connections. Such an approach harmonizes with community support work, strengthening the capacity of community members to secure health during public health emergencies.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: La pandémie de la COVID-19 a posé des défis importants à ceux qui visent à transmettre des informations et à offrir des services de santé publique équitables. Nous examinons comment les responsables d'organismes communautaires, les militants pour les droits et les spécialistes de la communication en santé publique ont abordé l'engagement communautaire auprès de communautés de la diaspora asiatique en Colombie-Britannique durant la pandémie. MéTHODES: Des entretiens qualitatifs ont été réalisés auprès de 27 participants travaillant avec des communautés asiatiques dans un cadre de soins de santé, de services communautaires ou de santé publique. Les entretiens ont été codés et analysés de manière inductive selon l'approche centrée sur la culture de la communication en matière de santé, qui se concentre sur les intersections entre structure, culture et agencéité. RéSULTATS: Les participants ont décrit les efforts de sensibilisation destinés à ceux qui ne sont potentiellement pas rejoints par les stratégies conventionnelles de communication en santé publique. Selon les participants, les barrières structurelles préexistantes telles que la pauvreté, les disparités raciales et les conditions d'emploi inéquitables ont aggravé l'expérience de la pandémie par les communautés de la diaspora asiatique. Ces disparités ont exacerbé les enjeux liés aux barrières linguistiques, à la surcharge d'informations et à l'évolution rapide des recommandations. Les participants ont suggéré de renforcer les capacités de communication et de sensibilisation au sein des services communautaires existants, qui étaient considérées comme trop faibles pour répondre aux besoins de la communauté, particulièrement en contexte pandémique. CONCLUSION: Il est essentiel d'améliorer la collaboration afin d'offrir des services et de mieux communiquer auprès de ces communautés. Pour des communications et des services de santé publique plus équitables, les besoins et les priorités doivent être identifiés en collaboration directe avec les représentants des communautés, et les relations de confiance préexistantes au sein des communautés doivent être mises à profit. Une telle approche s'harmonise avec le travail de soutien communautaire et contribuerait de façon durable à améliorer les capacités des communautés à protéger la santé pendant les urgences de santé publique.

What do adolescents think about vaccines? Systematic review of qualitative studies.

Adolescence presents a key opportunity to build vaccine-related health literacy and promote vaccine confidence and uptake. Although adolescents are central to vaccination programs, their views around vaccines are frequently underrepresented in qualitative literature. We reviewed qualitative studies to systematically identify and summarize existing evidence on adolescents' own understanding of vaccines and experiences with vaccine decision-making, including self-consent when applicable. CINAHL; Embase; Ovid Medline; and Psych Info database searches were last updated on May 28, 2022. Data pertaining to general study characteristics, participant demographics, and qualitative content were extracted independently by two reviewers and analyzed using textual narrative synthesis. Out of 3559 individual records, 59 studies were included. The majority of the studies were conducted in high-income countries and 75% focused on human papilloma virus vaccines, with the remaining studies looking at COVID-19, meningococcal, hepatitis B and influenza vaccines or adolescent experiences with vaccines in general. Adolescent self-consent was explored in 7 studies. Perspectives from sexual and gender minorities were lacking across studies. Adolescents often had limited understanding of different vaccines and commonly perceived vaccine information to be directed towards their parents rather than themselves. Many adolescents felt school-based vaccine education and information available through healthcare providers were insufficient to make informed decisions about vaccines. While adolescents described obtaining vaccine information from traditional and online media, face-to-face interactions and opinions from trusted adults remained important. Adolescents generally relied on their parents for vaccine-decision making, even when self-consent was an option. A notable exception to this included marginalized adolescents who could not rely on parents for health-related advice. Qualitative literature about adolescent vaccines would be enriched by studies examining vaccines other than the HPV vaccine, studies examining adolescent vaccine programs in low and middle-income countries, and by deliberately eliciting vaccine experiences of adolescent with diverse sexual orientation and gender identities.

Vaccines, Politics and Mandates: Can We See the Forest for the Trees? Comment on "Convergence on Coercion: Functional and Political Pressures as Drivers of Global Childhood Vaccine Mandates".

Under-vaccination is a complex problem that is not simple to address whether this is for routine childhood immunization or for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. Vaccination mandates has been one policy instrument used to try to increase vaccine uptake. While the concept may appear straight forward there is no standard approach. The decision to shift to a more coercive mandated program may be influenced by both functional and/or political needs. With mandates there may be patient and/or public push back. Anti-mandate protests and increased public polarization has been seen with COVID-19 vaccine mandates. This may negatively impact on vaccine acceptance ie, be counterproductive, causing more harm than overall good in the longer term. We need a better understanding of the political and functional needs that drive policy change towards mandates as well as cases studies of the shorter- and longer-term outcomes of mandates in both routine and pandemic settings.

A qualitative investigation of facilitators and barriers to accessing COVID-19 vaccines among Racialized and Indigenous Peoples in Canada.

Structural and systemic inequalities can contribute to susceptibility to COVID-19 disease and limited access to vaccines. Recognizing that Racialized and Indigenous Peoples may experience unique barriers to COVID-19 vaccination, this study explored early COVID-19 vaccine accessibility, including barriers and potential solutions to vaccine access, for these communities in Canada. We conducted semi-structured interviews about challenges to accessing COVID-19 vaccination with Racialized and Indigenous Peoples, including linguistic minorities and newcomers, in Spring 2021, just as COVID-19 vaccines were becoming more widely available in Canada. Participants were purposely selected from respondents to a Canadian national online survey. Three researchers analyzed the interviews for emergent themes using a descriptive content analysis approach in NVivo. At the time of the interview, interview participants (N = 27) intended to receive (n = 15) or had received (n = 11) at least one vaccine dose, or did not state their status (n = 1). Participants described multiple barriers to COVID-19 vaccination that they personally experienced and/or anticipated they or others could experience - including technology requirements, language barriers, lack of identification documentation, and travel challenges - as well as related solutions. These were organized into three broad categories: 1) COVID-19 disease and vaccination information, 2) vaccination booking procedures, and 3) vaccination sites. These structural and systemic barriers during the initial months of vaccine rollout substantially restricted participants' COVID-19 vaccination access, even when they were eager to get vaccinated, and should be addressed early in vaccine rollouts to facilitate optimal uptake for everyone everywhere.

Understanding the Influence of Web-Based Information, Misinformation, Disinformation, and Reinformation on COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance: Protocol for a Multicomponent Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has generated an explosion in the amount of information shared on the internet, including false and misleading information on SARS-CoV-2 and recommended protective behaviors. Prior to the pandemic, web-based misinformation and disinformation were already identified as having an impact on people's decision to refuse or delay recommended vaccination for themselves or their children. OBJECTIVE: The overall aims of our study are to better understand the influence of web-based misinformation and disinformation on COVID-19 vaccine decisions and investigate potential solutions to reduce the impact of web-based misinformation and disinformation about vaccines. METHODS: Based on different research approaches, the study will involve (1) the use of artificial intelligence techniques, (2) a web-based survey, (3) interviews, and (4) a scoping review and an environmental scan of the literature. RESULTS: As of September 1, 2022, data collection has been completed for all objectives. The analysis is being conducted, and results should be disseminated in the upcoming months. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study will help with understanding the underlying determinants of vaccine hesitancy among Canadian individuals and identifying effective, tailored interventions to improve vaccine acceptance among them. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41012.

Public health communication during the COVID-19 pandemic: perspectives of communication specialists, healthcare professionals, and community members in Quebec, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Communication during a pandemic is key in ensuring adoption of preventive behaviours and limiting disease transmission. The aim of the study was to explore how communication specialists working in health and governmental institutions and healthcare professionals have communicated about COVID-19, and how different groups of the public have perceived official communications on COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory qualitative study. Data were collected via individual semi-structured interviews and focus-group discussions. The Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication (CERC) model was used as a theoretical framework to guide data interpretation. RESULTS: We interviewed 6 communication specialists and 5 healthcare professionals. Three focus groups were held with 23 participants (8 young adults, 9 Quebecers of Asian ethnicity, and 6 Quebecers who suffered harshly from economic consequences of the pandemic and measures). Although daily press conferences were rapidly implemented in Quebec, participants highlighted several communication challenges, including accuracy and credibility of information in a context of uncertainties and rapidly evolving knowledge. Participants also identified paternalism, stigmatization of some communities, and issues with promoting action and mobilization of some subpopulations as communication challenges. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that the six core CERC principles have not all been applied systematically in communication interventions in Quebec. Despite some limitations, messages about COVID-19 risk were clearly and consistently communicated and were generally well understood by most Quebecers.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: La communication en temps de pandémie joue un rôle clé dans l'adoption des comportements préventifs et le contrôle de la transmission de la maladie. Cette étude visait à explorer comment les spécialistes de la communication travaillant dans les institutions gouvernementales et de santé et les professionnels de la santé ont communiqué sur la COVID-19 et comment les différents groupes du public ont perçu les communications officielles sur la COVID-19. MéTHODE: Les données de cette étude qualitative exploratoire ont été recueillies à l'aide d'entretiens individuels semi-structurés et de groupes de discussion. Le modèle de la communication des risques en situation de crise et d'urgence (CERC) a été utilisé comme cadre théorique pour guider l'interprétation des données. RéSULTATS: Nous avons rencontré 6 experts en communication et 5 professionnels de la santé. Trois groupes de discussion ont eu lieu avec 23 participants (8 jeunes adultes, 9 Québécois d'origine asiatique et 6 Québécois ayant subi des conséquences financières importantes à cause de la pandémie et des mesures sanitaires). Bien que des conférences de presse quotidiennes aient été rapidement mises en place au Québec, les participants ont souligné plusieurs défis de communication, notamment en ce qui concerne l'exactitude et la crédibilité de l'information dans un contexte d'incertitudes et d'évolution rapide des connaissances. Les participants ont également identifié le paternalisme, la stigmatisation de certaines communautés et les problèmes de promotion de l'action et de mobilisation au sein de certaines sous-populations comme des défis de communication. CONCLUSION: Notre étude a démontré que les six principes fondamentaux du CERC n'ont pas tous été appliqués systématiquement dans les interventions de communication au Québec. Malgré certaines limites, les messages sur le risque lié à la COVID-19 ont été communiqués de manière claire et cohérente et ont été généralement bien compris par la plupart des Québécois.