Investigating preferences of the covid-19 vaccine among individuals in Iran: Discrete choice experiment analysis.

Background and Aims: This study aimed to estimate the preferences for COVID-19 vaccines among a sample of Iranian adults and to understand the sources of preference heterogeneity. Methods: A web-based survey was conducted from April to July 2021; out of 1747 participants, 678 completed the survey. Seven key attributes were selected, namely effectiveness, risk of severe side effects, risk of mild side effects, number of doses, duration of protection, location of manufacture, and price. Additionally, conditional logit and mixed logit models were used to analyze the data. Results: The results of this study indicate that vaccine effectiveness, protective duration, the risk of side effects, and price are the most important factors that influence vaccine preferences. Furthermore, we identified heterogeneity in preferences, indicating that not all individuals respond in the same way to vaccine attributes. Conclusion: The majority of Iranians prefer to get the Covid-19 vaccine. Policymakers should consider these findings when implementing successful programs. This study contributes to the literature by estimating Iranian respondents' preferences for the Covid-19 vaccine and identifying the heterogeneity in their preferences for vaccine attributes. The findings may also inform future research and policies related to Covid-19 vaccination programs in Iran.

Preference of young adults for COVID-19 vaccination in the United Kingdom: a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVES: To determine preferences for COVID-19 vaccinations in the young adult population in the United Kingdom (UK). METHOD: A discrete choice experiment survey was conducted in UK young adults. Participants were asked to choose between two hypothetical vaccines the one they preferred the most. Vaccines were defined by five attributes (effectiveness, risk of side effects, duration of protection, number of doses, confidence in available evidence), identified following a systematic literature review and qualitative interviews with 13 young adults. A random parameters logit model, a latent class model, and subgroup analyses were used to identify preferences. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-nine respondents were included (70% women, mean age 23 years). All five attributes significantly influenced respondents' vaccination decisions. Respondents valued higher effectiveness, lower risk of side effects, longer protection duration, and a smaller number of doses. Based on the range of levels of each attribute, vaccine effectiveness was the most important attribute (relative importance 34%), followed by risk of side effects (32%), and duration of vaccine protection (22%). CONCLUSIONS: The five investigated vaccine attributes appear to play an important role in young adults' decision-making process. Results of this study may help health authorities designing appropriate strategies in future vaccines campaigns in the younger UK population.

Understanding the role of personal experiences and contextual variables in shaping risk reduction preferences.

This article explores how preferences for risk reduction during the COVID-19 pandemic are influenced by personal experiences and contextual variables such as having a close friend or relative who has been infected by the virus (closeness), the severity of the illness (severity), people's own perceptions of being in a risky group (risk group), change in employment status due to the pandemic (employment situation), and vaccination status (vaccination status and altruistic vaccination). We conducted a choice experiment (CE) in Chile, Colombia, and Costa Rica. The attributes of the experiment were risk reduction, latency, and cost. Then, we estimated a mixed logit model to capture preference heterogeneity across the countries. The attributes presented in the CE were statistically significant, with the expected sign in each country. The variables closeness and employment situation presented homogeneous behavior in each country; however, severity, risk group, and vaccination status showed mixed results. We found that preferences were more heterogeneous for the attributes of the CE than for the personal experiences and contextual variables. Understanding the impact of these variables is essential for generating more effective risk reduction policies. For instance, methodologies such as the value of statistical life base their calculations on society's valuation of risk reduction. We provide evidence that the preferences for risk reduction vary due to the everyday situations that individuals face in the context of the pandemic. The latter may cause distortions in the values used to evaluate policies aimed at mitigating the outbreak.

Preparing for future pandemics: A multi-national comparison of health and economic trade-offs.

Government investment in preparing for pandemics has never been more relevant. The COVID-19 pandemic has stimulated debate regarding the trade-offs societies are prepared to make between health and economic activity. What is not known is: (1) how much the public in different countries are prepared to pay in forgone GDP to avoid mortality from future pandemics; and (2) which health and economic policies the public in different countries want their government to invest in to prepare for and respond to the next pandemic. Using a future-focused, multi-national discrete choice experiment, we quantify these trade-offs and find that the tax-paying public is prepared to pay $3.92 million USD (Canada), $4.39 million USD (UK), $5.57 million USD (US) and $7.19 million USD (Australia) in forgone GDP per death avoided in the next pandemic. We find the health policies that taxpayers want to invest in before the next pandemic and the economic policies they want activated once the next pandemic hits are relatively consistent across the countries, with some exceptions. Such results can inform economic policy responses and government investment in health policies to reduce the adverse impacts of the next pandemic.

COVID-19 Vaccination Preferences Among Non-Chinese Migrants in Hong Kong: Discrete Choice Experiment.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown increasing COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among migrant populations in certain settings compared to the general population. Hong Kong has a growing migrant population with diverse ethnic backgrounds. Apart from individual-level factors, little is known about the migrants' preference related to COVID-19 vaccines. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate which COVID-19 vaccine-related attributes combined with individual factors may lead to vaccine acceptance or refusal among the migrant population in Hong Kong. METHODS: An online discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted among adults, including Chinese people, non-Chinese Asian migrants (South, Southeast and Northeast Asians), and non-Asian migrants (Europeans, Americans, and Africans) in Hong Kong from February 26 to April 26, 2021. The participants were recruited using quota sampling and sent a link to a web survey. The vaccination attributes included in 8 choice sets in each of the 4 blocks were vaccine brand, safety and efficacy, vaccine uptake by people around, professionals' recommendation, vaccination venue, and quarantine exemption for vaccinated travelers. A nested logistic model (NLM) and a latent-class logit (LCL) model were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 208 (response rate 62.1%) migrant participants were included. Among the migrants, those with longer local residential years (n=31, 27.7%, for ≥10 years, n=7, 20.6%, for 7-9 years, n=2, 6.7%, for 4-6 years, and n=3, 9.7%, for ≤3 years; P=.03), lower education level (n=28, 28.3%, vs n=15, 13.9%, P=.01), and lower income (n=33, 25.2%, vs n=10, 13.2%, P=.04) were more likely to refuse COVID-19 vaccination irrespective of vaccination attributes. The BioNTech vaccine compared with Sinovac (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=1.75, 95% CI 1.14-2.68), vaccine with 90% (AOR=1.44, 95% CI 1.09-1.91) and 70% efficacy (AOR=1.21, 95% CI 1.03-1.44) compared with 50% efficacy, vaccine with fewer serious adverse events (1/100,000 compared with 1/10,000; AOR=1.12, 95% CI 1.00-1.24), and quarantine exemption for cross-border travelers (AOR=1.14, 95% CI 1.01-1.30) were the vaccine attributes that could increase the likelihood of vaccination among migrants. For individual-level factors, full-time homemakers (AOR=0.44, 95% CI 0.29-0.66), those with chronic conditions (AOR=0.61, 95% CI 0.41-0.91) and more children, and those who frequently received vaccine-related information from the workplace (AOR=0.42, 95% CI 0.31-0.57) were found to be reluctant to accept the vaccine. Those with a higher income (AOR=1.79, 95% CI 1.26-2.52), those knowing anyone infected with COVID-19 (AOR=1.73, 95% CI 1.25-2.38), those having greater perceived susceptibility of COVID-19 infection (AOR=3.42, 95% CI 2.52-4.64), those who received the influenza vaccine (AOR=2.15, 95% CI 1.45-3.19), and those who frequently received information from social media (AOR=1.52, 95% CI 1.12-2.05) were more likely to accept the vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: This study implies that migrants have COVID-19 vaccination preference heterogeneity and that more targeted and tailored approaches are needed to promote vaccine acceptance for different subgroups of the migrant population in Hong Kong. Vaccination promotion strategies are needed for low-education and low-income migrant groups, migrants with chronic diseases, the working migrant population, homemakers, and parents.

Rationing of a scarce life-saving resource: Public preferences for prioritizing COVID-19 vaccination.

In the face of limited COVID-19 vaccine supply, governments have had to identify priority groups for vaccination. In October 2020, when it was still uncertain whether COVID-19 vaccines would be shown to work in trials, we conducted a discrete choice experiment and a best-worst ranking exercise on a representative sample of 2060 Belgians in order to elicit their views on how to set fair vaccination priorities. When asked directly, our respondents prioritized the groups that would later receive priority: essential workers, the elderly or those with pre-existing conditions. When priorities were elicited indirectly, through observing choices between individuals competing for a vaccine, different preferences emerged. The elderly were given lower priority and respondents divided within two clusters. While both clusters wanted to vaccinate the essential workers in the second place, one cluster (N = 1058) primarily wanted to target virus spreaders in order to control transmission whereas the other cluster (N = 886) wanted to prioritize those who were most at risk because of a pre-existing health condition. Other strategies to allocate a scarce resource such as using a "lottery", "first-come, first-served" approach or highest willingness-to-pay received little support.

Nurse practitioner job preference: A discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Nurse practitioners play a critical role in improving the access to care and in meeting the needs for health care. However, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the average turnover rate of nurse practitioners was 10 % with associated total direct cost that ranged from $85,832 to $114,919 for each episode of turnover in the United States. Little is known about the job preference of nurse practitioners and the cost savings to an organization that provides jobs with characteristics attractive to nurse practitioners. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the preferred job characteristics that are associated with nurse practitioners' job choices; and to determine the extent to which nurse practitioners would need to be compensated for practicing without these characteristics. DESIGN: A two-stage design using a mixed method approach. SETTING(S): The state of Georgia in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 2757 nurse practitioners who were actively licensed were invited to participate. Of the 412 participants, 372 actively employed in Georgia were included in the analysis. METHODS: A 2-stage discrete choice experiment was designed. Stage-1 was a qualitative design using a focus group to identify nurse practitioners' preferred job characteristics. Stage-2 was a quantitative design using survey distribution and analysis. A mixed logit model was used for ranking nurse practitioners' preferred job characteristics and the extent to which they would need to be compensated. RESULTS: On average nurse practitioners were 47.4 years of age; the majority were female (90 %), white (75.3 %), and educated at the master's level (88.7 %). Participants did not value teams that were not very cohesive (ß = -1.50); administration that was not very responsive and supportive (ß = -1.04); being supervised by a physician (ß = -0.58); not having their own panel of patients (ß = -0.42); and not billing under their own National Provider Identifier (ß = -0.18). Participants would need an increase in annual income of USD$21,780 for practicing in a not very cohesive team; USD$15,280 for practicing with a not very responsive administration; and USD$21,450 for being supervised by a physician. CONCLUSIONS: A cohesive, responsive, and supportive working environment and being able to practice independently are important characteristics for nurse practitioners when choosing a job. Healthcare managers should provide a workplace culture that reflects these preferred job characteristics to attract and retain nurse practitioners. Policymakers should consider reforming the scope of practice legislation to promote the independent practice of nurse practitioners.

Preferences for COVID-19 epidemic control measures among French adults: a discrete choice experiment.

In this stated preferences study, we describe for the first time French citizens' preferences for various epidemic control measures, to inform longer-term strategies and future epidemics. We used a discrete choice experiment in a representative sample of 908 adults in November 2020 (before vaccination was available) to quantify the trade-off they were willing to make between restrictions on the social, cultural, and economic life, school closing, targeted lockdown of high-incidence areas, constraints to directly protect vulnerable persons (e.g., self-isolation), and measures to overcome the risk of hospital overload. The estimation of mixed logit models with correlated random effects shows that some trade-offs exist to avoid overload of hospitals and intensive care units, at the expense of stricter control measures with the potential to reduce individuals' welfare. The willingness to accept restrictions was shared to a large extent across subgroups according to age, gender, education, vulnerability to the COVID-19 epidemic, and other socio-demographic or economic variables. However, individuals who felt at greater risk from COVID-19, and individuals expressing high confidence in the governmental management of the health and economic crisis, more easily accepted all these restrictions. Finally, we compared the welfare impact of alternative strategies combining different epidemic control measures. Our results suggest that policies close to a targeted lockdown or with medically prescribed self-isolation were those satisfying the largest share of the population and achieving high gain in average welfare, while average welfare was maximized by the combination of all highly restrictive measures. This illustrates the difficulty in making preference-based decisions on restrictions.

Psoriasis patient preferences for the use of biologics during the coronavirus era.

Understanding patient preferences concerning the use of biologics for psoriasis treatment can support proper treatment selection to satisfy their needs. In Japan, limited studies have reported psoriasis patients' preferences for the use of biologics, and many of those focused on the improvement of skin symptoms. The present study was conducted as a web-based questionnaire survey using the discrete choice experiment approach to investigate the preferences of psoriasis patients for the use of biologics, as well as to describe social and clinical factors that influence these preferences. The following attributes were selected for the discrete choice experiment: efficacy at 1 year, risk of serious infections requiring hospitalization, incidence of injection site reactions, administration route and visits, co-payment, indications, and efficacy on skin symptoms and other manifestations (the last two have not been evaluated in previous studies). Data were collected from October 4 to October 8, 2021. An analysis of data from 357 psoriasis patients indicated that the most preferred attributes for biologics selection were administration route and visits, followed by the risk of serious infections requiring hospitalization. Some differences were observed among specific subgroups. This study demonstrated that patients with psoriasis prefer biologics with a less frequent administration route and visit schedule and a lower risk of serious infections requiring hospitalization, which contrasts with the results obtained in previous studies where the highest importance was placed on drug effectiveness. These results may reflect the personal and social impact of the coronavirus disease outbreak at the time of the survey. The results of this study might help physicians properly select biologics that satisfy psoriasis patients' needs, leading to better treatment adherence.

Willingness to Pay and Preferences Among Patients Undergoing Cystoscopies: Results from a Large Survey-Based Study in Spain.

Purpose: Cystoscopy procedures can cause distress among patients. Patient perspectives on health services are essential inputs in decision-making. This study investigated the patient preferences in Spain regarding single-use cystoscopes (SUC) compared to reusable cystoscopes and their willingness to pay (WTP) for cystoscopy procedures. Patients and Methods: Between May and June 2021, an anonymous survey was distributed to Spanish patients who had previously undergone a cystoscopy. The survey included patient preference measures on reusable cystoscopes compared to SUCs and a discrete choice experiment. The survey was distributed through a human data science company (IQVIA), collected using an online survey tool (QuestionPro®), and analyzed using Stata/MP, StataCorp. Results: Of 300 respondents, 148 (49.33%) were female and 150 (50%) were male, and mainly between 18-49 years (247, 82.33%). Most (265, 88%) preferred to have their procedure performed with a SUC rather than a reusable cystoscope. Among these patients, 215 (80%) could imagine asking their doctor to use a SUC. A total of 231 (77%) respondents indicated an increased level of concern about the risk of exposure to contamination related to their cystoscopy following the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients would pay 62 EUR to have their initial consultation and cystoscopy procedure on the same day (p < 0.001), 59 EUR to reduce the environmental impact, and 57 EUR to reduce the risk of contamination (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Patients prefer to undergo cystoscopy using an SUC on the same day as their initial consultation. The increased contamination concerns due to the COVID-19 pandemic and WTP to reduce the risk of cystoscope contamination may explain patients' preferences for SUCs. The most important attributes related to their cystoscopy procedure are the ability to have their procedure performed on the same day as their initial consultation, the reduction of the environmental impact, and the reduction of the contamination risk.

Willingness to pay for policies to reduce health risks from COVID-19: Evidence from U.S. professional sports.

Airborne transmission of the COVID-19 virus increased the need for health policies to reduce transmission in congregate settings associated with minimal risk before the pandemic. While a large literature estimates tradeoffs between policies designed to reduce negative health outcomes, no empirical research addresses consumer willingness to pay (WTP) for health policies designed to reduce airborne virus transmission. Using survey data from 1381 fans of professional sports, we estimate consumers' WTP for reduced likelihood of coronavirus transmission through mask and social distancing policies using a stated preference approach. The results indicate increased attendance likelihood if the venue requires masks and limits attendance, with significant heterogeneity in WTP across risk scenarios and sports. We characterize consumers as casual fans who prefer a mask requirement but are indifferent to capacity constraints, strong fans who are anti-maskers and prefer capacity constraints, and a second group of casual fans with positive WTP under both mask and limited capacity requirements. For example, casual fans' WTP for masking, $38 per National Basketball Association (NBA) game attended, is more than double their WTP for capacity constraints only. Strong fans' WTP for attending capacity constrained NBA games was $490, more than 400% higher than the pre-pandemic average WTP of $105.

The Relative Importance of Vulnerability and Efficiency in COVID-19 Contact Tracing Programmes: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Objectives: This study aims to assess the trade-offs between vulnerability and efficiency attributes of contact tracing programmes based on preferences of COVID-19 contact tracing practitioners, researchers and other relevant stakeholders at the global level. Methods: We conducted an online discrete choice experiment (DCE). Respondents were recruited globally to explore preferences according to country income level and the prevailing epidemiology of COVID-19 in the local setting. The DCE attributes represented efficiency (timeliness, completeness, number of contacts), vulnerability (vulnerable population), cooperation and privacy. A mixed-logit model and latent class analysis were used. Results: The number of respondents was 181. Timeliness was the most important attribute regardless of country income level and COVID-19 epidemiological condition. Vulnerability of contacts was the second most important attribute for low-to-lower-middle-income countries and third for upper-middle-to-high income countries. When normalised against conditional relative importance of timeliness, conditional relative importance of vulnerability ranged from 0.38 to 0.42. Conclusion: Vulnerability and efficiency criteria were both considered to be important attributes of contact tracing programmes. However, the relative values placed on these criteria varied significantly between epidemiological and economic context.

Parental refusal and hesitancy of vaccinating children against COVID-19: Findings from a nationally representative sample of parents in the U.S.

The uptake rate of COVID-19 vaccines among children remains low in the U.S. This study aims to 1) identify sociodemographic and behavioral factors influencing parental refusal of vaccinating children, and 2) quantify the relative importance of vaccine characteristics in parental hesitancy of vaccinating children. An online survey was conducted from October to November 2021 among a probability-based, representative sample of 1456 parents with children under age 18. The survey included a discrete choice experiment asking parents to choose between two hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine alternatives with varying levels of characteristics in 10 hypothetical scenarios. Logistic regressions were used to estimate parental refusal (refused to choose any vaccine alternatives in all hypothetical scenarios) and random parameter logit regressions were used to estimate parental hesitancy (choice of vaccine alternatives depended on vaccine characteristics) of vaccinating children. About 20% parents refused to vaccinate children. The refusal is predicted by parents' sociodemographic characteristics, political orientation, vaccination status, and parents' and children's previous exposure with COVID-19. Among parents who were willing to consider vaccinating children, the most important vaccine characteristics are risk of severe side effects (31.2% relative importance) and effectiveness (30.7%), followed by protection duration (22.6%), local coverage (9.4%), and hospitalization rate of unvaccinated children (6.1%). Our findings imply that policymakers and public health professionals could develop outreach programs at community level to encourage specific subgroups and focus on vaccination depoliticization. Effectively communicating the low risk of severe side effects and high effectiveness of the vaccines may relieve some of the parental hesitancy.

What drives the acceptability of restrictive health policies: An experimental assessment of individual preferences for anti-COVID 19 strategies.

The public acceptability of a policy is an important issue in democracies, in particular for anti-COVID-19 policies, which require the adherence of the population to be applicable and efficient. Discrete choice experiment (DCE) can help elicit preference ranking among various policies for the whole population and subgroups. Using a representative sample of the French population, we apply DCE methods to assess the acceptability of various anti-COVID-19 measures, separately and as a package. Owing to the methods, we determine the extent to which acceptability depends on personal characteristics: political orientation, health vulnerability, or age. The young population differs in terms of policy preferences and their claim for monetary compensation, suggesting a tailored policy for them. The paper provides key methodological tools based on microeconomic evaluation of individuals' preferences for improving the design of public health policies.

Essential for society but not equally deserving of preferential treatment? A discrete-choice experiment regarding COVID-19 healthcare.

Workers' risks of contracting COVID-19 vary according to individual behaviors, occupations and job characteristics. Therefore, persons may consider different groups of workers more or less deserving of COVID-19 healthcare. To evaluate such preferences, we conducted an online conjoint experiment on the precedence of ICU treatment and COVID-19 vaccination. Our results demonstrate that working in essential occupations increases the likelihood of being considered deserving of vaccination and ICU treatment. We also find differences in how essential workers are prioritized, yet these differences cannot be clearly attributed to risk exposure or occupational prestige. Furthermore, we show that age, asthma, household context and compliance with COVID-19 measures significantly affect respondents' choices, while weight matters only for vaccination priority. Our results therefore contribute to research regarding the characteristics that are salient to fair distributions of scarce resources among workers during a health crisis.

Preferences for Attributes of Initial COVID-19 Diagnosis in the United States and China During the Pandemic: Discrete Choice Experiment With Propensity Score Matching.

BACKGROUND: China and the United States play critical leading roles in the global effort to contain the COVID-19 virus. Therefore, their population's preferences for initial diagnosis were compared to provide policy and clinical insights. OBJECTIVE: We aim to quantify and compare the public's preferences for medical management of fever and the attributes of initial diagnosis in the case of presenting symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in China and the United States. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study from January to March 2021 in China and the United States using an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire distributed through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk; in the United States) and recruited volunteers (in China). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match the 2 groups of respondents from China and the United States to minimize confounding effects. In addition, the respondents' preferences for different diagnosis options were evaluated using a mixed logit model (MXL) and latent class models (LCMs). Moreover, demographic data were collected and compared using the chi-square test, Fisher test, and Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: A total of 9112 respondents (5411, 59.4%, from China and 3701, 40.6%, from the United States) who completed our survey were included in our analysis. After PSM, 1240 (22.9%) respondents from China and 1240 (33.5%) from the United States were matched for sex, age, educational level, occupation, and annual salary levels. The segmented sizes of 3 classes of respondents from China were 870 (70.2%), 270 (21.8%), and 100 (8.0%), respectively. Meanwhile, the US respondents' segmented sizes were 269 (21.7%), 139 (11.2%), and 832 (67.1%), respectively. Respondents from China attached the greatest importance to the type of medical institution (weighted importance=40.0%), while those from the United States valued the waiting time (weighted importance=31.5%) the most. Respondents from China preferred the emergency department (coefficient=0.973, reference level: online consultation) and fever clinic (a special clinic for the treatment of fever patients for the prevention and control of acute infectious diseases in China; coefficient=0.974, reference level: online consultation), while those from the United States preferred private clinics (general practices; coefficient=0.543, reference level: online consultation). Additionally, shorter waiting times, COVID-19 nucleic acid testing arrangements, higher reimbursement rates, and lower costs were always preferred. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in the availability of COVID-19 testing and medical professional skills and increased designated health care facilities may help boost potential health care seeking during COVID-19 and prevent unrecognized community spreading of SARS-CoV-2 in China and the United States. Moreover, to better prevent future waves of pandemics, identify undiagnosed patients, and encourage those undiagnosed to seek health care services to curb the pandemic, the hierarchical diagnosis and treatment system needs improvement in China, and the United States should focus on reducing diagnosis costs and raising the reimbursement rate of medical insurance.

Vaccine preferences driving vaccine-decision making of different target groups: a systematic review of choice-based experiments.

BACKGROUND: Choice-based experiments have been increasingly used to elicit preferences for vaccines and vaccination programs. This study aims to systematically identify and examine choice-based experiments assessing (differences in) vaccine preferences of vaccinees, representatives and health advisors. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched on choice-based conjoint analysis studies or discrete choice experiments capturing vaccine preferences of children, adolescents, parents, adults and healthcare professionals for attributes of vaccines or vaccine settings up to September 2020. Data was extracted using a standardized form covering all important aspects of choice experiments. A quality assessment was used to assess the validity of studies. Attributes were categorized into outcome, process, cost and other. The importance of attributes was assessed by the frequency of reporting and statistical significance. Results were compared between high-quality studies and lower-quality studies. RESULTS: A total of 42 studies were included, with the majority conducted in high-income countries after 2010 (resp. n = 34 and n = 37). Preferences of representatives were studied in nearly half of the studies (47.6%), followed by vaccinees (35.7%) and health advisors (9.5%). Sixteen high-quality studies passed the quality assessment. Outcome- and cost- related attributes such as vaccine effectiveness, vaccine risk, cost and protection duration were most often statistically significant across both target groups, with vaccine effectiveness being the most important. Risks associated with vaccination, such as side effects, were more often statistically significant in studies targeting vaccinees, while cost-related attributes were more often statistically significant in studies of representatives. Process-related attributes such as vaccine accessibility and time were least important across both target groups. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review in which vaccine preferences of different target groups were assessed and compared. The same attributes were most important for vaccine decisions of vaccinees and representatives, with only minor differences in level of evidence for vaccine risk and cost. Future research on vaccine preferences of health advisors and/or among target groups in low-resource settings would give insight into the generalizability of current findings.

Malaysian public preferences and decision making for COVID-19 vaccination: A discrete choice experiment.

Background: Low vaccine uptake has the potential to seriously undermine COVID-19 vaccination programs, as very high coverage levels are likely to be needed for virus suppression to return life to normal. We aimed to determine the influence of vaccine attributes (including access costs) on COVID-19 vaccination preferences among the Malaysian public to improve national uptake. Methods: An online Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) was conducted on a representative sample of 2028 Malaysians. Respondents were asked to make vaccination decisions in a series of hypothetical scenarios. A nested, mixed logit model was used to estimate the preferences for vaccination over vaccine refusal and for how those preferences varied between different sub-populations. The attributes were the risk of developing severe side effects of the vaccine, vaccine effectiveness, vaccine content, vaccination schedule, and distance from home to vaccination centre. Findings: Reported public uptake of COVID-19 vaccination was primarily influenced by the risk of developing severe side effects (b = -1·747, 95% CI = -2·269, -1·225), vaccine effectiveness (b = 3·061, 95% CI = 2·628, 3·494) and its Halal status (b = 3·722, 95% CI = 3·152, 4·292). Other factors such as appointment timing and travel distance to the vaccination centre also had an effect on vaccine uptake. There was substantial heterogeneity in preferences between different populations, particularly for age groups, ethnicity, regions, and underlying health conditions. Interpretation: Perceived effectiveness and side effects are likely to affect COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Malaysia. Halal content is critical to Malays' vaccination choices. Reducing the physical distance to vaccination centres, particularly in rural areas where uptake is lower, is likely to improve uptake. Funding: Ministry of Health Research Grant from the Malaysian government [NIH/800-3/2/1 Jld.7(46), grant reference no: 57377 and warrant no: 91000776].

Optimizing the Practice Environment for Medical Staff in the Post-pandemic Era: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Objective: This study aimed to elicit the stated job preferences of Chinese medical staff in the post-pandemic era and identify the relative importance of different factors in the practice environment. Methods: We used an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey instrument to elicit the job preferences of medical staff (doctors and nurses) in tertiary hospitals in Anhui, China. Attributes and levels were generated using qualitative methods, and four attributes were considered: career development, workload, respect from society, and monthly income. A set of profiles was created using a D-efficient design. The data were analyzed considering potential preference heterogeneity, using the conditional logit model and the latent class logit (LCL) model. Results: A total of 789 valid questionnaires were included in the analysis, with an effective response rate of 73.33%. Career development, workload, respect from society, and monthly income were significant factors that influenced job preferences. Three classes were identified based on the LCL model, and preference heterogeneity among different medical staff was demonstrated. Class 1 (16.17%) and Class 2 (43.51%) valued respect from society most, whereas Class 3 (40.32%) prioritized monthly income. We found that when respect from society was raised to a satisfactory level (50-75% positive reviews), the probability of medical staff choosing a certain job increased by 69.9%. Conclusion: Respect from society was the most preferred attribute, while workload, monthly income, and career development were all key factors in the medical staff's job choices. The heterogeneity of the medical professionals' preferences shows that effective policy interventions should be customized to accommodate these drive preferences.

South African University Staff and Students' Perspectives, Preferences, and Drivers of Hesitancy Regarding COVID-19 Vaccines: A Multi-Methods Study.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy poses a threat to the success of vaccination programmes currently being implemented. Concerns regarding vaccine effectiveness and vaccine-related adverse events are potential barriers to vaccination; however, it remains unclear whether tailored messaging and vaccination programmes can influence uptake. Understanding the preferences of key groups, including students, could guide the implementation of youth-targeted COVID-19 vaccination programmes, ensuring optimal uptake. This study examined university staff and students' perspectives, preferences, and drivers of hesitancy regarding COVID-19 vaccines. A multi-methods approach was used-an online convenience sample survey and discrete choice experiment (DCE)-targeting staff and students at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The survey and DCE were available for staff and students, and data were collected from 18 November to 24 December 2021. The survey captured demographic characteristics as well as attitudes and perspectives of COVID-19 and available vaccines using modified Likert rating questions adapted from previously used tools. The DCE was embedded within the survey tool and varied critical COVID-19 vaccine programme characteristics to calculate relative utilities (preferences) and determine trade-offs. A total of 1836 staff and students participated in the study (541 staff, 1262 students, 33 undisclosed). A total of 1145 (62%) respondents reported that they had been vaccinated against COVID-19. Vaccination against COVID-19 was less prevalent among students compared with staff (79% of staff vs. 57% of students). The vaccine's effectiveness (22%), and its safety (21%), ranked as the two dominant reasons for not getting vaccinated. These concerns were also evident from the DCE, with staff and students being significantly influenced by vaccine effectiveness, with participants preferring highly effective vaccines (90% effective) as compared with those listed as being 70% or 50% effective (ß = -3.72, 95% CI = -4.39 to -3.04); this characteristic had the strongest effect on preferences of any attribute. The frequency of vaccination doses was also found to have a significant effect on preferences with participants deriving less utility from choice alternatives requiring two initial vaccine doses compared with one dose (ß = -1.00, 95% CI = -1.42 to -0.58) or annual boosters compared with none (ß = -2.35, 95% CI = -2.85 to -1.86). Notably, an incentive of ZAR 350 (USD 23.28) did have a positive utility (ß = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.76 to 1.53) as compared with no incentive. Given the slow take-up of vaccination among youth in South Africa, this study offers valuable insights into the factors that drive hesitancy among this population. Concerns have been raised around the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, although there remains a predilection for efficient services. Respondents were not enthusiastic about the prospect of having to take boosters, and this has played out in the roll-out data. Financial incentives may increase both the uptake of the initial dose of vaccines and see a more favourable response to subsequent boosters. Universities should consider tailored messaging regarding vaccine effectiveness and facilitate access to vaccines, to align services with the stated preferences of staff and students.