COVID-19 Vaccination Perceptions Among Young Adults of Color in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Background: COVID-19 vaccination rates among U.S. young adults, particularly in communities of color, remain lower than other age groups. We conducted a qualitative, community-based participatory study to explore beliefs and attitudes about COVID-19 vaccines among young adults in Black/African American, Latinx, and Asian American or Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities in the San Francisco Bay Area. Methods: We conducted six focus groups between June and August 2021. Participants were recruited by partnering with community-based organizations in the San Francisco Bay Area. Focus groups included Black/African American (N=13), Latinx (N=20), and AAPI (N=12) participants between 18 and 30 years of age. Emerging themes were identified using a modified Grounded Theory approach. Results: Prominent themes among all three racial-ethnic groups included mistrust in medical and government institutions, strong conviction about self-agency in health decision-making, and exposure to a thicket of contradictory information and misinformation in social media. Social benefit and a sense of familial and societal responsibility were often mentioned as reasons to get vaccinated. Young adult mistrust had a generational flavor fueled by anger about increasing inequity, the profit-orientation of pharmaceutical companies and health institutions, society's failure to rectify injustice, and pessimism about life prospects. Conclusion: Factors influencing vaccine readiness among Black/African American, Latinx, and AAPI young adults have a distinct generational and life-course texture. Outreach efforts should appeal to young adults' interest in family and social responsibility and the social benefits of vaccination, while being cognizant of the friction mandates pose for young adults' sense of self-agency. Efforts will be most effective coming from trusted messengers with a proven commitment to communities of color and health equity.

Addressing the challenges of conducting community-engaged research during COVID-19: Rapid development and evaluation of a COVID-19 Research Patient and Community Advisory Board (PCAB).

Introduction: We created a COVID-19 Research Patient and Community Advisory Board (PCAB) to provide patient and community input into clinical and translational research studies. The purpose of this article is to describe the PCAB creation, implementation, and evaluation. Methods: We identified PCAB members who had participated in previous stakeholder engaged activities at our institution and invited their participation. We created a systematic consultation process where researchers could submit plain language research summaries and questions for the PCAB. A facilitated 1-hour virtual consultation was then held where PCAB members provided feedback. We assessed satisfaction of PCAB members and researchers who received consultations using surveys. We also reviewed video recordings of PCAB consultations and reflections from team meetings to identify key lessons learned. Results: Twenty-seven PCAB members took part in 23 consultation sessions. Twenty-two completed an evaluation survey (81% response rate). Most members agreed or strongly agreed their opinions were valued (86%), it was a productive use of time (86%) and were satisfied (86%). Nineteen researchers completed an evaluation survey (83% response rate). Researchers reported positive experiences of working with the PCAB. Additional insights include limited funding in COVID-19 research for equitable community engagement, deficiencies in researcher communication skills, and a lack of cultural humility incorporated into study activities. Conclusions: PCAB members provided recommendations that maximized the patient-centeredness and health equity focus of COVID-19 research. The detailed description of the process of developing, implementing, and evaluating our PCAB can be used as a template for others wishing to replicate this engagement model.

COVID-19 vaccination readiness among multiple racial and ethnic groups in the San Francisco Bay Area: A qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccination rates are lower among historically marginalized populations, including Black/African American and Latinx populations, threatening to contribute to already high COVID-19 morbidity and mortality disparities for these groups. We conducted a community-based participatory research study using qualitative methods to explore knowledge and beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination among Black/African American, Latinx, and Chinese American residents of the San Francisco Bay Area and assess their views on vaccination outreach and delivery strategies. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Data were collected from January 14, 2021, to February 24, 2021, with adult residents (N = 109 [Female: N = 76; 70%]) in San Francisco. Focus groups (N = 10) and in-depth interviews (N = 25) were conducted among Black/African Americans (N = 35), Latinx (N = 40), and Chinese Americans (n = 34) in English, Spanish, Cantonese, or Mandarin. Themes were identified using grounded field theory, and included misinformation, mistrust of government and health institutions, and linguistic and other barriers to vaccine access. All three racial/ethnic groups had experiences with vaccine misinformation and information overload. Many African American and Latinx participants cited structural and interpersonal racism, and anti-immigrant discrimination, as factors reducing their trust in government and public health disseminated information and their willingness to be vaccinated. Participants expressed trust in community-based organizations, including faith-based organizations and community-run clinics. Participants often experienced barriers to vaccine access, such as transportation to drive-in sites, with Latinx and Chinese American groups also frequently citing language barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine outreach strategies must acknowledge how longstanding systemic, institutional, and structural racism contributes to mistrust in government and health institutions and engage with and support trusted messengers from the community to eliminate cultural, linguistic, and other barriers to vaccine access.

It should not require a pandemic to make community engagement in research leadership essential, not optional.

Efforts to move community engagement in research from marginalized to mainstream include the NIH requiring community engagement programs in all Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs). However, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed how little these efforts have changed the dominant culture of clinical research. When faced with the urgent need to generate knowledge about prevention and treatment of the novel coronavirus, researchers largely neglected to involve community stakeholders early in the research process. This failure cannot be divorced from the broader context of systemic racism in the US that has contributed to Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) communities bearing a disproportionate toll from COVID-19, being underrepresented in COVID-19 clinical trials, and expressing greater hesitancy about COVID-19 vaccination. We call on research funders and research institutions to take decisive action to make community engagement obligatory, not optional, in all clinical and translational research and to center BIPOC communities in this process. Recommended actions include funding agencies requiring all research proposals involving human participants to include a community engagement plan, providing adequate funding to support ongoing community engagement, including community stakeholders in agency governance and proposal reviews, promoting racial and ethnic diversity in the research workforce, and making a course in community engaged research a requirement for Masters of Clinical Research curricula.