Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 36
Filter
1.
Nat Hum Behav ; 2022 Nov 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2185877
2.
Risk Anal ; 42(7): 1409-1422, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097865

ABSTRACT

In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) named "Vaccine Hesitancy" one of the top 10 threats to global health. Shortly afterward, the COVID-19 pandemic emerged as the world's predominant health concern. COVID-19 vaccines of several types have been developed, tested, and partially deployed with remarkable speed; vaccines are now the primary control measure and hope for a return to normalcy. However, hesitancy concerning these vaccines, along with resistance to masking and other control measures, remains a substantial obstacle. The previous waves of vaccine hesitancy that led to the WHO threat designation, together with recent COVID-19 experience, provide a window for viewing new forms of social amplification of risk (SAR). Not surprisingly, vaccines provide fertile ground for questions, anxieties, concerns, and rumors. These appear in new globalized hyperconnected communications landscapes and in the context of complex human (social, economic, and political) systems that exhibit evolving concerns about vaccines and authorities. We look at drivers, impacts, and implications for vaccine initiatives in several recent historical examples and in the current efforts with COVID-19 vaccination. Findings and insights were drawn from the Vaccine Confidence Project's decade long monitoring of media and social media and its related research efforts. The trends in vaccine confidence and resistance have implications for updating the social amplification of risk framework (SARF); in turn, SARF has practical implications for guiding efforts to alleviate vaccine hesitancy and to mitigate harms from intentional and unintentional vaccine scares.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Vaccination
3.
Vaccine ; 2022 Oct 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2086814

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Polarized debates about Covid-19 vaccination and vaccine mandates for healthcare workers (HCWs) challenge Belgian HCWs ability to discuss Covid-19 vaccine sentiments with peers and patients.Although studies have identified drivers of HCWs vaccine hesitancy, they do not include effects of workplace interactions and have not addressed consequences beyond vaccine coverage. METHODS: Interviews and focus group discussions with 74 HCWs practicing in Belgium addressed Covid-19 vaccine sentiments and experiences of discussing vaccination with peers and patients. RESULTS: Most participating HCWs reported difficulties discussing Covid-19 vaccination with peers and patients. Unvaccinated HCWs often feared that expressing their vaccine sentiments might upset patients or peers and that they would be suspended. Consequently, they used social cues to evaluate others' openness to vaccine-skeptical discourses and avoided discussing vaccines. Surprisingly, some vaccine-confident HCWs hid their vaccine sentiments to avoid peer and patient conflicts. Both vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs observed that unvaccinated patients occasionally received suboptimal care. Suboptimal care was central in unvaccinated HCW unwillingness to express their vaccine sentiments to peers. Both vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs described loss of trust and ruptured social relations with peers and patients holding divergent vaccine sentiments. DISCUSSION: Belgian HCW perceived Covid-19 vaccines as a risky discussion topic and engaged in "strategic silences" around vaccination to maintain functional work relationships and employment in health institutions. Loss of trust between HCW and peers or patients, along with suboptimal patient care based on vaccination status, threaten to weaken Belgium's, and by implication, other health systems, and to catalyze preventable disease outbreaks.

4.
Vaccine X ; 12: 100219, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2041991

ABSTRACT

Background: Health care professionals are widely considered to be the most trusted source of information on vaccine-related topics. However, several are reporting their own hesitancy around certain vaccines, influencing their intention to vaccinate themselves as well as influencing their recommendations to their patients and target population. Methods: A mixed-methods approach was used including an online survey (n = 1,504) in 15 countries which aimed to determine drivers of HCPs vaccine confidence and examine how these drivers vary across nations. Thirty in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 HCPs in a subset of three countries (France, Greece and Hungry) to explore barriers to HCPs vaccine uptake and their role in addressing vaccine hesitancy among patients.Findings.The survey's regression analysis identified that nurses/midwives and HCPs from Hungary, Italy, Romania and Switzerland were less confident in the safety, importance or effectiveness of vaccines in general. Morocco (35%), Turkey (53%) and Greece (69%) reported the lowest influenza vaccination coverage among HCPs. Morocco also reported the lowest rates of HCPs who were "highly likely" to recommend MMR vaccine (34%), HPV vaccine (31%) and Covid-19 vaccines (29%). More than third of HCPs reported a lack of trust in health authorities and in the information they provide. Thematic analysis revealed that concerns over the risk of side-effects associated with vaccines, preference for natural immunity, whether it was necessary to be vaccinated against influenza every year, not having any chronic disease risk factors, and vaccines mandates as the key barriers to HCPs vaccination against influenza and Covid-19. Conclusion: HCPs have an important role in vaccination and their confidence in vaccination and health authorities must be improved as this may affect their uptake of vaccines and influence their recommendations to their patients. Investigating the impact of political, socio-economic and cultural contexts on concerns about vaccination among HCPs is also necessary.

5.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 22(10): 1484-1492, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2036636

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: China has low seasonal influenza vaccination rates among priority populations. In this study, we aimed to evaluate a pay-it-forward strategy to increase influenza vaccine uptake in rural, suburban, and urban settings in China. METHODS: We performed a quasi-experimental pragmatic trial to examine the effectiveness of a pay-it-forward intervention (a free influenza vaccine and an opportunity to donate financially to support vaccination of other individuals) to increase influenza vaccine uptake compared with standard-of-care user-paid vaccination among children (aged between 6 months and 8 years) and older people (≥60 years) in China. Recruitment took place in the standard-of-care group until the expected sample size was reached and then in the pay-it-forward group in primary care clinics from a rural site (Yangshan), a suburban site (Zengcheng), and an urban site (Tianhe). Participants were introduced to the influenza vaccine by project staff using a pamphlet about influenza vaccination and were either asked to pay out-of-pocket at the standard market price (US$8·5-23·2; standard-of-care group) or to donate any amount anonymously (pay-it-forward group). Participants had to be eligible to receive an influenza vaccine and to have not received an influenza vaccine in the past year. The primary outcome was vaccine uptake. Secondary outcomes were vaccine confidence and costs (from the health-care provider perspective). Regression methods compared influenza vaccine uptake and vaccine confidence between the two groups. This trial is registered with ChiCTR, ChiCTR2000040048. FINDINGS: From Sept 21, 2020, to March 3, 2021, 300 enrolees were recruited from patients visiting three primary care clinics. 55 (37%) of 150 people in the standard-of-care group (40 [53%] of 75 children and 15 [20%] of 75 older adults) and 111 (74%) of 150 in the pay-it-forward group (66 [88%] of 75 children and 45 [60%] of 75 older adults) received an influenza vaccine. People in the pay-it-forward group were more likely to receive an influenza vaccine compared with those in the standard-of-care group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 6·7 [95% CI 2·7-16·6] among children and 5·0 [2·3-10·8] among older adults). People in the pay-it-forward group had greater confidence in vaccine safety (aOR 2·2 [95% CI 1·2-3·9]), importance (3·1 [1·6-5·9]), and effectiveness (3·1 [1·7-5·7]). In the pay-it-forward group, 107 (96%) of 111 participants donated money for subsequent vaccinations. The pay-it-forward group had a lower economic cost (calculated as the cost without subtraction of donations) per person vaccinated (US$45·60) than did the standard-of-care group ($64·67). INTERPRETATION: The pay-it-forward intervention seemed to be effective in improving influenza vaccine uptake and community engagement. Our data have implications for prosocial interventions to enhance influenza vaccine uptake in countries where influenza vaccines are available for a fee. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the UK National Institute for Health Research.


Subject(s)
Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Aged , Child , China , Humans , Infant , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Odds Ratio , Vaccination
6.
Nature Human Behaviour ; 5(3):407, 2021.
Article in English | APA PsycInfo | ID: covidwho-2011885

ABSTRACT

Reports an error in "Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA" by Sahil Loomba, Alexandre de Figueiredo, Simon J. Piatek, Kristen de Graaf and Heidi J. Larson (Nature Human Behaviour, 2021[Mar], Vol 5[3], 337-348). In the original article, reference number of the ethics application approved by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine ethics committee was incorrectly quoted. The correct number is 22647. Also, debriefing information was originally only provided in Supplementary Information. The following sentence has been added for clarification to the Methods section in the updated article: "All respondents exposed to misinformation were debriefed after the survey;debriefing information can be found in the questionnaire included in Supplementary Information." These errors have been corrected in the PDF and HTML versions of this article. (The following of the original article appeared in record 2021-29746-012). [Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 5(7) of Nature Human Behaviour (see record 2021-69306-024). In the original article, the subscript for the gamma element in equation (7) should have been k rather than j;i.e., it should read as given in erratum. The error has been corrected in the PDF and HTML versions of this article.] Widespread acceptance of a vaccine for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) will be the next major step in fighting the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but achieving high uptake will be a challenge and may be impeded by online misinformation. To inform successful vaccination campaigns, we conducted a randomized controlled trial in the UK and the USA to quantify how exposure to online misinformation around COVID-19 vaccines affects intent to vaccinate to protect oneself or others. Here we show that in both countries-as of September 2020-fewer people would 'definitely' take a vaccine than is likely required for herd immunity, and that, relative to factual information, recent misinformation induced a decline in intent of 6.2 percentage points (95th percentile interval 3.9 to 8.5) in the UK and 6.4 percentage points (95th percentile interval 4.0 to 8.8) in the USA among those who stated that they would definitely accept a vaccine. We also find that some sociodemographic groups are differentially impacted by exposure to misinformation. Finally, we show that scientific-sounding misinformation is more strongly associated with declines in vaccination intent. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

8.
Prev Med ; 161: 107138, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1915099

ABSTRACT

With approval of more COVID-19 vaccines for children, vaccine attributes may influence parental acceptance and choices. We aimed to assess effects of vaccine attributes and information on herd immunity on childhood COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. A survey experiment was conducted with caregivers of children aged 6 months to 11 years old and health care workers (HCWs) in China from September 14 to November 18, 2021. Respondents were randomly assigned to receive differing information on herd immunity (> 80% of the entire population must be vaccinated; or no information). Respondents then completed eight discrete choice tasks to assess vaccine acceptance based on attributes. 2331 (90.07%) of 2588 surveyed caregivers and 1576 (92.71%) of 1700 surveyed HCWs would accept COVID-19 vaccination for children, respectively. High Odds Ratios (OR) were found for acceptance of a vaccine with 90% over 50% efficacy (OR 6.70 [95% CI 6.11-7.35] for caregivers; 11.44 [10.12-12.95] for HCWs); and risk of adverse reactions to be 1 over 10 in 10,000 (3.96 [3.72-4.22] for caregivers; 2.98 [2.76-3.22] for HCWs). To achieve herd immunity target (> 80% vaccination coverage), vaccine efficacy should reach over 70% and risk of adverse reactions lower than 1 in 10,000. Knowledge on herd immunity target increased the odds of vaccine acceptance (1.82 [1.34-2.46] for caregivers; 2.42 [1.58-3.72] for HCWs). Childhood COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was high in China, independent of child's age, and depended on vaccine attributes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevention & control , Caregivers , Child , China/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Surveys and Questionnaires , Vaccination
9.
Expert Rev Vaccines ; 21(9): 1269-1287, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1873754

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Migration can be linked to the transmission of vaccine-preventable diseases. Hence, monitoring migrants' vaccination-related concerns can inform needed interventions to support vaccine acceptance. AREAS COVERED: Along with Google and Google Scholar, we searched 13 bibliographic databases between 1 January 2000 and 10 October 2020, to identify published studies of vaccine hesitancy among migrant populations. From a total of 8,915 records, we screened 745 abstracts and included 112 eligible articles. We summarized extracted data using figures, tables, and narrations. Of the 112 articles, 109 were original quantitative (48%), qualitative (45%), and mixed-methods (7%) research, originating mainly from the United States (US) (68%), the United Kingdom (UK) (12%), and Scandinavia (6%). Most articles addressed human papillomavirus (63%), measles (13%), and influenzas (9%) vaccinations, and the leading sponsor of funded research was the US National Institutes of Health (50%). Discernable migrant groups with vaccine-specific concerns included Somali diasporas, UK-based Poles and Romanians, and US-based Haitians and Koreans. Among US-based Latina/Latino immigrants, lower vaccine uptake frequency was mostly associated with awareness levels, knowledge gaps, and uninsured status. EXPERT OPINION: Migrants' vaccine-related apprehensions may cascade well beyond their proximate social connections and influence vaccine attitudes and behaviors in their countries-of-origin.


Subject(s)
Transients and Migrants , Vaccine-Preventable Diseases , Vaccines , Humans , United States , Vaccination , Vaccination Hesitancy
10.
Commun Med (Lond) ; 1: 30, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1860412

ABSTRACT

Background: As the world begins the rollout of multiple COVID-19 vaccines, pandemic exit strategies hinge on widespread acceptance of these vaccines. In this study, we perform a large-scale global exploratory study to examine the levels of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and explore sociodemographic determinants of acceptance. Methods: Between October 31, 2020 and December 15, 2020, 26,759 individuals were surveyed across 32 countries via nationally representative survey designs. Bayesian methods are used to estimate COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and explore the sociodemographic determinants of uptake, as well as the link between self-reported health and faith in the government's handling of the pandemic and acceptance. Results: Here we show that intent to accept a COVID-19 vaccine is low in Lebanon, France, Croatia, and Serbia and there is population-level polarisation in acceptance in Poland and Pakistan. Averaged across all countries, being male, over 65, having a high level of education, and believing that the government is handling the pandemic well are associated with increased stated acceptance, but there are country-specific deviations. A belief that the government is handling the pandemic well in Brazil and the United States is associated with lower vaccination intent. In the United Kingdom, we find that approval of the first COVID-19 vaccine in December 2020 did not appear to have an impact on the UK's vaccine acceptance, though as rollout has continued into 2021, the UK's uptake exceeds stated intent in large-scale surveys conducted before rollout. Conclusions: Identifying factors that may modulate uptake of novel COVID-19 vaccines can inform effective immunisation programmes and policies. Differential stated intent to accept vaccines between socio-demographic groups may yield insights into the specific causes of low confidence and may suggest and inform targeted communication policies to boost confidence.

12.
Nat Med ; 28(3): 456-459, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1740459

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 'infodemic' continues to undermine trust in vaccination efforts aiming to bring an end to the pandemic. However, the challenge of vaccine hesitancy is not only a problem of the information ecosystem and it often has little to do with the vaccines themselves. In this Perspective, we argue that the epidemiological and social crises brought about by COVID-19 have magnified widely held social anxieties and trust issues that, in the unique circumstances of this global pandemic, have exacerbated skepticism toward vaccines. We argue that trust is key to overcoming vaccine hesitancy, especially in a context of widespread social uncertainty brought about by the pandemic, where public sentiment can be volatile. Finally, we draw out some implications of our argument for strategies to build vaccine confidence.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Ecosystem , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Uncertainty , Vaccination
13.
JMIR Infodemiology ; 1(1): e26895, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1430611

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Massive community-wide testing has become the cornerstone of management strategies for the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This study was a comparative analysis between the United Kingdom and China, which aimed to assess public attitudes and uptake regarding COVID-19 testing, with a focus on factors of COVID-19 testing hesitancy, including effectiveness, access, risk perception, and communication. METHODS: We collected and manually coded 3856 UK tweets and 9299 Chinese Sina Weibo posts mentioning COVID-19 testing from June 1 to July 15, 2020. Adapted from the World Health Organization's 3C Model of Vaccine Hesitancy, we employed social listening analysis examining key factors of COVID-19 testing hesitancy (confidence, complacency, convenience, and communication). Descriptive analysis, time trends, geographical mapping, and chi-squared tests were performed to assess the temporal, spatial, and sociodemographic characteristics that determine the difference in attitudes or uptake of COVID-19 tests. RESULTS: The UK tweets demonstrated a higher percentage of support toward COVID-19 testing than the posts from China. There were much wider reports of public uptake of COVID-19 tests in mainland China than in the United Kingdom; however, uncomfortable experiences and logistical barriers to testing were more expressed in China. The driving forces for undergoing COVID-19 testing were personal health needs, community-wide testing, and mandatory testing policies for travel, with major differences in the ranking order between the two countries. Rumors and information inquiries about COVID-19 testing were also identified. CONCLUSIONS: Public attitudes and acceptance toward COVID-19 testing constantly evolve with local epidemic situations. Policies and information campaigns that emphasize the importance of timely testing and rapid communication responses to inquiries and rumors, and provide a supportive environment for accessing tests are key to tackling COVID-19 testing hesitancy and increasing uptake.

14.
EClinicalMedicine ; 40: 101109, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1401435

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The UK Government is considering the introduction of vaccine passports for domestic use and to facilitate international travel for UK residents. Although vaccine incentivisation has been cited as a motivating factor for vaccine passports, it is unclear whether vaccine passports are likely to increase inclination to accept a COVID-19 vaccine. METHODS: We conducted a large-scale national survey in the UK of 17,611 adults between 9 and 27 April 2021. Bayesian multilevel regression and poststratification is used to provide unbiased national-level estimates of the impact of the introduction of vaccine passports on inclination to accept COVID-19 vaccines and identify the differential impact of passports on uptake inclination across socio-demographic groups. FINDINGS: We find that a large minority of respondents report that vaccination passports for domestic use (46·5%) or international travel (42·0%) would make them no more or less inclined to accept a COVID-19 vaccine and a sizeable minority of respondents also state that they would 'definitely' accept a COVID-19 vaccine and that vaccine passports would make them more inclined to vaccinate (48·8% for domestic use and 42·9% for international travel). However, we find that the introduction of vaccine passports will likely lower inclination to accept a COVID-19 vaccine once baseline vaccination intent has been adjusted for. This decrease is larger if passports were required for domestic use rather than for facilitating international travel. Being male (OR 0·87, 0·76 to 0·99) and having degree qualifications (OR 0·84, 0·72 to 0·94) is associated with a decreased inclination to vaccinate if passports were required for domestic use (while accounting for baseline vaccination intent), while Christians (OR 1·23, 1·08 to 1·41) have an increased inclination over atheists or agnostics. Change in inclination is strongly connected to stated vaccination intent and will therefore unlikely shift attitudes among Black or Black British respondents, younger age groups, and non-English speakers. INTERPRETATION: Our findings should be interpreted in light of sub-national trends in uptake rates across the UK, as our results suggest that passports may be viewed less positively among socio-demographic groups that cluster in large urban areas. We call for further evidence on the impact of vaccine certification and the potential fallout for routine immunization programmes in both the UK and in wider global settings, especially those with low overall trust in vaccinations. FUNDING: This survey was funded by the Merck Investigator Studies Program (MISP).

15.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0256496, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1369567

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: While vaccines ensure individual protection against COVID-19 infection, delay in receipt or refusal of vaccines will have both individual and community impacts. The behavioral factors of vaccine hesitancy or refusal are a crucial dimension that need to be understood in order to design appropriate interventions. The aim of this study was to explore the behavioral determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and to provide recommendations to increase the acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines in Bangladesh. METHODS: We employed a Barrier Analysis (BA) approach to examine twelve potential behavioral determinants (drawn from the Health Belief Model [HBM] and Theory of Reasoned Action [TRA]) of intended vaccine acceptance. We conducted 45 interviews with those who intended to take the vaccine (Acceptors) and another 45 interviews with those who did not have that intention (Non-acceptors). We performed data analysis to find statistically significant differences and to identify which beliefs were most highly associated with acceptance and non-acceptance with COVID-19 vaccines. RESULTS: The behavioral determinants associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in Dhaka included perceived social norms, perceived safety of COVID-19 vaccines and trust in them, perceived risk/susceptibility, perceived self-efficacy, perceived positive and negative consequences, perceived action efficacy, perceived severity of COVID-19, access, and perceived divine will. In line with the HBM, beliefs about the disease itself were highly predictive of vaccine acceptance, and some of the strongest statistically-significant (p<0.001) predictors of vaccine acceptance in this population are beliefs around both injunctive and descriptive social norms. Specifically, Acceptors were 3.2 times more likely to say they would be very likely to get a COVID-19 vaccine if a doctor or nurse recommended it, twice as likely to say that most people they know will get a vaccine, and 1.3 times more likely to say that most close family and friends will get a vaccine. The perceived safety of vaccines was found to be important since Non-acceptors were 1.8 times more likely to say that COVID-19 vaccines are "not safe at all". Beliefs about one's risk of getting COVID-19 disease and the severity of it were predictive of being a vaccine acceptor: Acceptors were 1.4 times more likely to say that it was very likely that someone in their household would get COVID-19, 1.3 times more likely to say that they were very concerned about getting COVID-19, and 1.3 times more likely to say that it would be very serious if someone in their household contracted COVID-19. Other responses of Acceptors on what makes immunization easier may be helpful in programming to boost acceptance, such as providing vaccination through government health facilities, schools, and kiosks, and having vaccinators maintain proper COVID-19 health and safety protocols. CONCLUSION: An effective behavior change strategy for COVID-19 vaccines uptake will need to address multiple beliefs and behavioral determinants, reducing barriers and leveraging enablers identified in this study. National plans for promoting COVID-19 vaccination should address the barriers, enablers, and behavioral determinants found in this study in order to maximize the impact on COVID-19 vaccination acceptance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Vaccination Refusal/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/psychology , Adult , Attitude , Bangladesh , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Culture , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Refusal/psychology
16.
Am J Public Health ; 111(6): 1058-1060, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1332055
17.
Curr Opin Immunol ; 71: 92-96, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1272367

ABSTRACT

In the context of emerging COVID-19 virus variants, trends of vaccine nationalism, and multiple vaccine supply challenges, COVID-19 vaccine related uncertainties and challenges continue. Additionally, confidence in new COVID-19 vaccines is highly variable, with minority communities generally less trusting of not only the new vaccines, but also those who produce them and the governments buying and recommending them. How governments handle the COVID-19 response will be a key influencer of public confidence in and acceptance of COVID vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Humans , Politics , Vaccination/methods
18.
Nat Rev Dis Primers ; 7(1): 41, 2021 06 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1269385

Subject(s)
Vaccines , Humans , Vaccination
19.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(6): e27632, 2021 06 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1249625

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Monitoring public confidence and hesitancy is crucial for the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Social media listening (infoveillance) can not only monitor public attitudes on COVID-19 vaccines but also assess the dissemination of and public engagement with these opinions. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess global hesitancy, confidence, and public engagement toward COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We collected posts mentioning the COVID-19 vaccine between June and July 2020 on Twitter from New York (United States), London (United Kingdom), Mumbai (India), and Sao Paulo (Brazil), and Sina Weibo posts from Beijing (China). In total, we manually coded 12,886 posts from the five global metropolises with high COVID-19 burdens, and after assessment, 7032 posts were included in the analysis. We manually double-coded these posts using a coding framework developed according to the World Health Organization's Confidence, Complacency, and Convenience model of vaccine hesitancy, and conducted engagement analysis to investigate public communication about COVID-19 vaccines on social media. RESULTS: Among social media users, 36.4% (571/1568) in New York, 51.3% (738/1440) in London, 67.3% (144/214) in Sao Paulo, 69.8% (726/1040) in Mumbai, and 76.8% (2128/2770) in Beijing indicated that they intended to accept a COVID-19 vaccination. With a high perceived risk of getting COVID-19, more tweeters in New York and London expressed a lack of confidence in vaccine safety, distrust in governments and experts, and widespread misinformation or rumors. Tweeters from Mumbai, Sao Paulo, and Beijing worried more about vaccine production and supply, whereas tweeters from New York and London had more concerns about vaccine distribution and inequity. Negative tweets expressing lack of vaccine confidence and misinformation or rumors had more followers and attracted more public engagement online. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is prevalent worldwide, and negative tweets attract higher engagement on social media. It is urgent to develop an effective vaccine campaign that boosts public confidence and addresses hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccine rollouts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Social Media/standards , COVID-19 Vaccines/pharmacology , Humans , Public Opinion , SARS-CoV-2
20.
American Journal of Public Health ; 111(6):1058-1060, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1242382

ABSTRACT

The threat of viral misinformation spread through social media was recognized well before this pandemic struck.2 The World Health Organization named "vaccine hesitancy" as one of the top 10 global health threats in 2019 and pointed to the risks of an "infodemic." To many, this narrative is plausible: it is precisely the narrative that those trying to undermine confidence in vaccines are promoting on social media.4 Second, the misinformation contains a gist-a compelling, simple, bottom-line meaning-that interprets the facts in light of political, cultural, and social values held in long-term memory by its audience.5 In the midst of a pandemic marked by repeated restrictions on movement, the value of personal autonomy is even more pronounced. Consider that a simple search on Google usingthe terms "vaccine mRNA" immediately yields a "COVID-19 alert" with several "common questions," including "Could an mRNA vaccine change my DNA?" Clicking on this question yields the following answer: "An mRNA vaccine-the first COVID-19 vaccine to be granted emergency use authorization (EUA) by the FDA [US Food and Drug Administration]-cannot change your DNA" (https://bit.ly/3uzxpnP). Even a more detailed factual response, such as the statement provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that "mRNA from the vaccine never enters the nucleus ofthe cell and does not affect or interact with a person's DNA" (https://bit.ly/2Pc95tn) may be misconstrued because it assumes that the listener possesses, and can contextualize, knowledge of cell biology.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL