Coronavirus conspiracy suspicions, general vaccine attitudes, trust and coronavirus information source as predictors of vaccine hesitancy among UK residents during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy presents an obstacle to the campaign to control COVID-19. It has previously been found to be associated with youth, female gender, low income, low education, low medical trust, minority ethnic group membership, low perceived risk from COVID-19, use of certain social media platforms and conspiracy beliefs. However, it is unclear which of these predictors might explain variance associated with others. METHODS: An online survey was conducted with a representative sample of 4343 UK residents, aged 18-75, between 21 November and 21 December 2020. Predictors of vaccine hesitancy were assessed using linear rank-order models. RESULTS: Coronavirus vaccine hesitancy is associated with youth, female gender, low income, low education, high informational reliance on social media, low informational reliance on print and broadcast media, membership of other than white ethnic groups, low perceived risk from COVID-19 and low trust in scientists and medics, as well as (to a much lesser extent) low trust in government. Coronavirus conspiracy suspicions and general vaccine attitudes appear uniquely predictive, jointly explaining 35% of variance. Following controls for these variables, effects associated with trust, ethnicity and social media reliance largely or completely disappear, whereas the effect associated with education is reversed. CONCLUSIONS: Strengthening positive attitudes to vaccination and reducing conspiracy suspicions with regards to the coronavirus may have a positive effect on vaccine uptake, especially among ethnic groups with heightened vaccine hesitancy. However, vaccine hesitancy associated with age and gender does not appear to be explained by other predictor variables tested here.

Trust and experiences of National Health Service healthcare do not fully explain demographic disparities in coronavirus vaccination uptake in the UK: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether demographic variation in vaccine hesitancy can be explained by trust and healthcare experiences. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Data collected online in April 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected from 4885 UK resident adults, of whom 3223 had received the invitation to be vaccinated against the novel coronavirus and could therefore be included in the study. 1629 included participants identified as female and 1594 as male. 234 identified as belonging to other than white ethnic groups, while 2967 identified as belonging to white ethnic groups. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Uptake of coronavirus vaccination. RESULTS: Membership of an other than white ethnic group (adjusted OR (AOR)=0.53, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.84, p=0.005) and age (AOR=1.61, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.87, p<0.001 for a 1 SD change from the mean) were the only statistically significant demographic predictors of vaccine uptake. After controls for National Health Service (NHS) healthcare experiences and trust in government, scientists and medical professionals, the effect associated with membership of an other than white ethnic group appears more marginal (AOR=0.61, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.01, p=0.046), while the effect associated with age remains virtually unchanged. Exploratory analysis suggests that NHS healthcare experiences mediate 24% (95% CI 8% to 100%, p=0.024) of the association between ethnicity and uptake, while trust mediates 94% (95% CI 56% to 100%, p=0.001) of the association between NHS healthcare experiences and uptake. CONCLUSIONS: Members of other than white ethnic groups report inferior NHS healthcare experiences, potentially explaining their lower reported trust in government, scientists and medical professionals. However, this does not fully explain the ethnic gap in coronavirus vaccination uptake.

Generation Covid

This pandemic is a generation-defining moment. What will it mean for those coming of age in its grasp, asks Bobby Duffy

Beyond the pandemic

Building back from covid-19 is an opportunity to address social inequities

Health-protective behaviour, social media usage and conspiracy belief during the COVID-19 public health emergency.

BACKGROUND: Social media platforms have long been recognised as major disseminators of health misinformation. Many previous studies have found a negative association between health-protective behaviours and belief in the specific form of misinformation popularly known as 'conspiracy theory'. Concerns have arisen regarding the spread of COVID-19 conspiracy theories on social media. METHODS: Three questionnaire surveys of social media use, conspiracy beliefs and health-protective behaviours with regard to COVID-19 among UK residents were carried out online, one using a self-selecting sample (N = 949) and two using stratified random samples from a recruited panel (N = 2250, N = 2254). RESULTS: All three studies found a negative relationship between COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and COVID-19 health-protective behaviours, and a positive relationship between COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and use of social media as a source of information about COVID-19. Studies 2 and 3 also found a negative relationship between COVID-19 health-protective behaviours and use of social media as a source of information, and Study 3 found a positive relationship between health-protective behaviours and use of broadcast media as a source of information. CONCLUSIONS: When used as an information source, unregulated social media may present a health risk that is partly but not wholly reducible to their role as disseminators of health-related conspiracy beliefs.

Media usage predicts intention to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 in the US and the UK.

There is existing evidence of a relationship between media use and vaccine hesitancy. Four online questionnaires were completed by general population samples from the US and the UK in June 2020 (N = 1198, N = 3890, N = 1663, N = 2237). After controls, all four studies found a positive association between intention to be vaccinated and usage of broadcast and print media. The three studies which operationalised media usage in terms of frequency found no effect for social media. However, the study which operationalised media use in terms of informational reliance found a negative effect for social media. Youth, low household income, female gender, below degree-level of education, and membership of other than white ethnic groups were each also found to be associated with lower intentions to be vaccinated in at least two of the four studies. In all four studies, intention to be vaccinated was positively associated with having voted either for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US presidential elections or for Labour Party candidates in the 2019 UK general election. Neither of the UK studies found an association with having voted for Conservative Party candidates, but both US studies found a negative association between intention to be vaccinated and having voted for Donald Trump. The consistent finding of greater intention to be vaccinated among users of legacy media but not among users of social media suggests that social media do not currently provide an adequate replacement for legacy media, at least in terms of public health communication. The finding of a negative association with social media in the study which measured informational reliance rather than frequency is consistent with the view that uncritical consumption of social media may be acting to promote vaccine hesitancy.

Anger and confrontation during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national cross-sectional survey in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate factors associated with anger or confronting others due to COVID-19. DESIGN: Online cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Data were collected between 17 and 20 July 2020. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2237 participants living in the UK aged 16-75 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reporting having had arguments, felt angry or fallen out with others because of COVID-19. Reporting having confronted or reported someone to the authorities, or that you had been confronted or reported to the authorities, for not wearing a face covering; not keeping your distance from others or being in too large a group; or alternatively following recommended measures too carefully. We used logistic regression analyses to identify factors associated with anger and confrontation. RESULTS: Most participants reported having had arguments, feeling angry or fallen out with others because of COVID-19 (56%, n = 1255). Twenty-two percent (n = 500) of participants reported that they had confronted or reported someone. Fourteen percent (n = 304) of participants reported that they had been confronted or reported by someone. Confronting someone, having been confronted and feeling angry or having had arguments were strongly associated with each other. Anger and confrontation were associated with younger age, greater likelihood of experiencing significant financial difficulties due to the pandemic, greater perceived risk of COVID-19 and getting information about COVID-19 from social media. CONCLUSIONS: Measures put in place to prevent the spread of COVID-19 have caused considerable strain. Increased support, clear messaging on the rationale for easing restrictions and combatting misinformation on social media may all help decrease tension.