Paranormal Beliefs, Vaccine Confidence, and COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake

Conservative religious ideologies have been linked to vaccine hesitancy. Yet, little is known about how paranormal beliefs relate to vaccine confidence and uptake. We hypothesize that paranormal beliefs will be negatively related to both confidence and uptake due to their association with lower levels of trust in science and a greater acceptance of conspiratorial beliefs. We test this hypothesis using a new nationally representative sample of U.S. adults fielded in May and June of 2021 by NORC. Using regression models with a sample of 1,734, we find that paranormal beliefs are negatively associated with general vaccine confidence, COVID-19 vaccine confidence, and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. These associations are partially or fully attenuated net of trust in science and conspiratorial belief. Although not a focus of the study, we also find that Christian nationalism's negative association with the outcomes is fully accounted for by measures of trust in science and conspiratorial beliefs. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Sociology of Religion is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Unintended consequences of communicating rapid COVID-19 vaccine policy changes- a qualitative study of health policy communication in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The success of the COVID-19 vaccination roll-out depended on clear policy communication and guidance to promote and facilitate vaccine uptake. The rapidly evolving pandemic circumstances led to many vaccine policy amendments. The impact of changing policy on effective vaccine communication and its influence in terms of societal response to vaccine promotion are underexplored; this qualitative research addresses that gap within the extant literature. METHODS: Policy communicators and community leaders from urban and rural Ontario participated in semi-structured interviews (N = 29) to explore their experiences of COVID-19 vaccine policy communication. Thematic analysis was used to produce representative themes. RESULTS: Analysis showed rapidly changing policy was a barrier to smooth communication and COVID-19 vaccine roll-out. Continual amendments had unintended consequences, stimulating confusion, disrupting community outreach efforts and interrupting vaccine implementation. Policy changes were most disruptive to logistical planning and community engagement work, including community outreach, communicating eligibility criteria, and providing translated vaccine information to diverse communities. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine policy changes that allow for prioritized access can have the unintended consequence of limiting communities' access to information that supports decision making. Rapidly evolving circumstances require a balance between adjusting policy and maintaining simple, consistent public health messages that can readily be translated into action. Information access is a factor in health inequality that needs addressing alongside access to vaccines.

Factors Associated With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine Uptake Among Pregnant Women and Nonpregnant Women of Reproductive Age in Jamaica.

Background: Despite high rates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related maternal mortality, Jamaica currently has little data on COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey of 192 reproductive-aged women in Jamaica from February 1 to 8, 2022. Participants were recruited from a convenience sample of patients, providers, and staff at a teaching hospital. We assessed self-reported COVID-19 vaccination status and COVID-19-related medical mistrust (operationalized as vaccine confidence, government mistrust, and race-based mistrust). We used multivariable modified Poisson regression to test the association between vaccine uptake and pregnancy. Results: Of 192 respondents, 72 (38%) were pregnant. Most (93%) were Black. Vaccine uptake was 35% in pregnant women versus 75% in nonpregnant women. Pregnant women were more likely to cite healthcare providers versus the government as trustworthy sources of COVID-19 vaccine information (65% vs 28%). Pregnancy, low vaccine confidence, and government mistrust were associated with a lower likelihood of COVID-19 vaccination (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 0.68 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .49-.95], aPR = 0.61 [95% CI, .40-.95], and aPR = 0.68 [95% CI, .52-.89], respectively). Race-based mistrust was not associated with COVID-19 vaccination in the final model. Conclusions: Pregnancy, low vaccine confidence, and government mistrust were associated with a lower likelihood of COVID-19 vaccination among reproductive-aged women in Jamaica. Future studies should evaluate the efficacy of strategies proven to improve maternal vaccination coverage, including standing "opt-out" vaccination orders and collaborative provider and patient-led educational videos tailored for pregnant individuals. Strategies that decouple vaccine messaging from government agencies also warrant evaluation.

Declining trends in vaccine confidence across sub-Saharan Africa: A large-scale cross-sectional modeling study.

Current WHO/UNICEF estimates of routine childhood immunization coverage reveal the largest sustained decline in uptake in three decades with pronounced setbacks across Africa. Although the COVID-19 pandemic has induced significant supply and delivery disruptions, the impact of the pandemic on vaccine confidence is less understood. We here examine trends in vaccine confidence across eight sub-Saharan countries between 2020 and 2022 via a total of 17,187 individual interviews, conducted via a multi-stage probability sampling approach and cross-sectional design and evaluated using Bayesian methods. Multilevel regression combined with poststratification weighting using local demographic information yields national and sub-national estimates of vaccine confidence in 2020 and 2022 as well as its socio-demographic associations. We identify declines in perceptions toward the importance of vaccines for children across all eight countries, with mixed trends in perceptions toward vaccine safety and effectiveness. We find that COVID-19 vaccines are perceived to be less important and safe in 2022 than in 2020 in six of the eight countries, with the only increases in COVID-19 vaccine confidence detected in Ivory Coast. There are substantial declines in vaccine confidence in the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Africa, notably in Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, and Northern Cape (South Africa) and Bandundu, Maniema, Kasaï-Oriental, Kongo-Central, and Sud-Kivu (DRC). While over 60-year-olds in 2022 have higher vaccine confidence in vaccines generally than younger age groups, we do not detect other individual-level socio-demographic associations with vaccine confidence at the sample sizes studied, including sex, age, education, employment status, and religious affiliation. Understanding the role of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated policies on wider vaccine confidence can inform post-COVID vaccination strategies and help rebuild immunization system resilience.

Vaccine hesitancy in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries.

Background: Vaccination has a tremendous impact on health at the regional and global levels, however, the tendency for people to hesitate on vaccination has been increasing in the past few decades. Aims: We assessed vaccine hesitancy and its determinants in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. Methods: We conducted a literature review to assess peer-reviewed articles published up to March 2021 on vaccine hesitancy in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach. A search was conducted via PubMed and 29 articles were identified. After the removal of duplicates and irrelevant articles, 14 studies remained relevant and were used for the review. Results: Vaccine hesitancy in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries ranged from 11% to 71%. Differences in rates were noted for vaccine type, with COVID-19 vaccine having the highest reported hesitancy (70.6%). The likelihood of accepting vaccination was associated with previous individual acceptance of vaccine, specifically the seasonal influenza vaccine. The most common determinants of vaccine hesitancy were distrust in vaccine safety and concerns about side-effects. Healthcare workers were among the main sources of information and recommendations about vaccination, but 17-68% of them were vaccine-hesitant. The majority of the healthcare workers had never received any training on addressing vaccine hesitancy among patients. Conclusions: Vaccine hesitancy is prevalent among the publics and healthcare workers in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. There is a need to continually monitor perceptions and knowledge about vaccines and vaccination in these countries to better inform interventions to improve vaccine uptake in the sub-region.

COVID-19 full vaccination and blockchain size: empirical evidence from the cryptocurrency market

PurposeThis paper aims to analyse COVID-19 indices and blockchain features on Bitcoin and Ethereum returns, respectively. The authors focus on the most used and owned cryptocurrencies that cover Europe, the US and Asian countries.Design/methodology/approachAn autoregressive distributed lag panel (pooled mean group and mean group) is utilized, and a robustness check is incorporated by using a Random Effect Model and Generalized Method of Moments (GMM).FindingsFour new findings were discovered, including (1) the vaccine confidence index (VCI) pushes economic recovery and increased demand for the Bitcoin market, but the opposite result was interestingly observed from Ethereum;(2) the blockchain features were revealed to be essential to Bitcoin, while they were irrelevant to Ethereum for short-run country-specific results;(3) the hash rate and network difficulty moved inversely during the pandemic;and (4) the government played a significant role in taking action during uncertain times and regarding cryptocurrency policies.Research limitations/implicationsVCI is constructed by the most used vaccine type in our sample countries (i.e. Pfizer), as the data for a specific classification by each type is still unavailable.Practical implicationsProviding an evenly distributed vaccination program primary vaccination series against COVID-19 to the citizens is an essential duty of the government. Bitcoin policymakers and investors should watch the COVID-19 vaccine distributions closely as it will affect its return. Ethereum is emphasized to keep developing its smart contract which appeared to outplay other blockchain features. Cryptocurrency investors should be wise in their investment decisions by analysing the news thoroughly.Social implicationsThis research emphasizes that the success in the roll-out of COVID-19 vaccination requires citizens' willingness to participate and their trust in the vaccine's efficacy. Such self-awareness and self-discipline in society can ultimately empower individuals and stabilise the economy. Nevertheless, the implementation of health protocols is still highly required to prevent the spread of new variants of COVID-19.Originality/valueThis is the first study that attempts to construct a VCI which denotes the confidence derived from the administration of full-dose COVID-19 vaccines (an initial vaccine and a second vaccine). The authors further find the impact on cryptocurrency returns. Next, blockchain size is utilized as a new determinant of cryptocurrencies.

[Vaccine hesitancy: current status, associated factors, measurement, and approach].

Definition and present status　Vaccine hesitancy, defined as "delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services," is a global public health concern. Specifically, COVID-19 and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine hesitancy remains a major social challenge in Japan, and effective preventive strategies are urgently required. In this review, we discuss previous studies that have described vaccine hesitancy.Associated factors　Vaccine hesitancy is affected by several factors, primarily psychological variables (referred to as the "3Cs" comprising confidence, complacency, and convenience regarding individuals' perceptions of vaccination) and sociodemographic variables (age, sex, socioeconomic status, race, and social capital). "Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination Framework", developed recently by the World Health Organization, has focused on vaccination-specific beliefs and reports that programs may affect and are likely to have wide applicability in the development of effective interventions.Measurement　Identification of psychological factors associated with vaccination hesitancy is important to establish strategies to increase vaccine uptake. Many scales are available to measure vaccine hesitancy and psychological factors that affect vaccine hesitancy. These scales include different evaluation items, validity, reliability, and availability of validated Japanese versions. Therefore, careful selection of scales based on their intended purpose and the target population in whom the desired intervention is intended are important. A representative 7C scale is widely used globally. It has been translated into more than 10 languages, including Japanese.Approach　Several studies and articles, mainly developed for the European and American populations provide guidelines for selection of evidence-based strategies and interventions to increase vaccine uptake. Evidence-based strategies may be broadly classified into the following categories: (1) Strengthening the healthcare system through implementation of the principles of behavioral science. (2) Development of tailored approaches using systematic listening activities. (3) Provision of evidence-based resources to support healthcare personnel. (4) Utilization of media. Based on findings described by previous studies discussed in this report, it may be important to plan strategies to improve the uptake of each vaccine in Japan, such as those for COVID-19, HPV, and also childhood vaccines.

Childhood Vaccination Practices and Parental Hesitancy Barriers in Rural and Urban Primary Care Settings.

The purpose of our study was to identify primary care providers' (PCPs') practices in promoting childhood vaccination and their perceptions regarding barriers to vaccination in a primarily rural state. In January-May 2022, we conducted a mail and online survey of PCPs across Montana (n = 829). The survey included modules on routine immunizations in children 0-2 years old and COVID-19 vaccination in children 5-17 years old. The survey response rate was 36% (298/829). We categorized PCPs as working in rural (n = 218) or urban areas (n = 80), based on Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes. We then compared responses between rural and urban PCPs using chi-square tests. Urban PCPs (90-94%, depending on vaccine) stocked routinely recommended vaccines more frequently than rural PCPs (71-84%), but stocked the COVID-19 vaccine less often than rural PCPs (44% vs. 71%, respectively, p < 0.001). A higher percentage of rural providers reported parental beliefs that vaccine-preventable diseases are not severe enough to warrant vaccination (48% vs. 31%, p = 0.01) and concerns that vaccination will weaken their child's immune system (29% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). More rural (74%) compared to urban (59%) PCPs identified a social media campaign from local health departments promoting early childhood vaccinations as an effective strategy to increase childhood vaccination rates (p = 0.01). We identified key differences in some childhood vaccination practices and barriers between rural and urban PCPs. Interventions to increase rural vaccination rates could include increasing the number of providers stocking all recommended vaccines, identifying strategies to address parents' concerns regarding vaccine necessity, and collaborations with public health departments.

Champions for School Health-An NASN Initiative to Increase Vaccine Confidence, Equity, and Uptake in COVID-19 and School-Required Vaccinations: Part 1.

The National Association of School Nurses (NASN) received a U.S.$2 million grant from Kaiser Permanente in January 2022 to increase confidence, equity, and uptake in the COVID-19 vaccine and other school required vaccinations in children ages 5 to 11 in Kaiser's nine markets (eight states and the District of Columbia). NASN was partnered with the Institute of Educational Leadership (IEL) in this initiative to examine ways both organizations could learn how school nurses (SNs) and community schools (CSs) could collaborate to address the goals of this project. NASN gave 54 Implementation Grants in two funding cycles in 2022 and is co-funding two SN-CS collaboration projects with IEL. The Part 1 article provides an overview of the project's goals, grant strategy and processes, grantee information, NASN created tools that resulted from this funding, and successful implementation of the project, which demonstrates NASN's capacity for future similar projects.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK: the Oxford coronavirus explanations, attitudes, and narratives survey (Oceans) II.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to estimate provisional willingness to receive a coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, identify predictive socio-demographic factors, and, principally, determine potential causes in order to guide information provision. METHODS: A non-probability online survey was conducted (24th September-17th October 2020) with 5,114 UK adults, quota sampled to match the population for age, gender, ethnicity, income, and region. The Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale assessed intent to take an approved vaccine. Structural equation modelling estimated explanatory factor relationships. RESULTS: 71.7% (n=3,667) were willing to be vaccinated, 16.6% (n=849) were very unsure, and 11.7% (n=598) were strongly hesitant. An excellent model fit (RMSEA=0.05/CFI=0.97/TLI=0.97), explaining 86% of variance in hesitancy, was provided by beliefs about the collective importance, efficacy, side-effects, and speed of development of a COVID-19 vaccine. A second model, with reasonable fit (RMSEA=0.03/CFI=0.93/TLI=0.92), explaining 32% of variance, highlighted two higher-order explanatory factors: 'excessive mistrust' (r=0.51), including conspiracy beliefs, negative views of doctors, and need for chaos, and 'positive healthcare experiences' (r=-0.48), including supportive doctor interactions and good NHS care. Hesitancy was associated with younger age, female gender, lower income, and ethnicity, but socio-demographic information explained little variance (9.8%). Hesitancy was associated with lower adherence to social distancing guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is relatively evenly spread across the population. Willingness to take a vaccine is closely bound to recognition of the collective importance. Vaccine public information that highlights prosocial benefits may be especially effective. Factors such as conspiracy beliefs that foster mistrust and erode social cohesion will lower vaccine up-take.

High Vaccine Confidence Is Associated with COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men Who Use Substances.

Purpose: We examined associations between vaccine confidence and COVID-19 vaccine uptake among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM). Methods: Computer-assisted self-interviews were conducted among 249 GBMSM participating in mSTUDY from May to October 2021-a cohort of GBMSM with a history of substance use in Los Angeles. Data were collected using a vaccine confidence index. The association between vaccine confidence and COVID-19 vaccine uptake was assessed using multivariable log-binomial regression. Results: Two-thirds (64.7%) of GBMSM reported receiving at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccine confidence was positively associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Participants expressed neutral attitudes on government trust and vaccine safety. Perceived health benefit and vaccine effectiveness were statistically significantly associated with vaccine uptake (adjusted prevalence ratio [APR] = 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-2.16; APR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.07-2.15). Conclusions: Public health programs should prioritize public benefit and vaccine effectiveness messaging to advance vaccination among GBMSM who use substances.

Development and validation of a multi-dimensional COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy questionnaire.

Background: Since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccines have been developed to tackle the disease. However, many people worldwide were not confident enough to take the vaccines. Developing a questionnaire to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy will give the health authorities and policymakers a clear picture to establish appropriate interventions addressing vaccine hesitancy among the community. Methods: In this study, we used a mixed-method design over two phases. Phase 1 entailed a qualitative approach to developing the questionnaire, including a literature search, expert panel review, and focus group discussion. Phase 2 used a quantitative method for establishing the content and construct validity of the questionnaire via exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA & CFA). Internal consistency was checked using Cronbach's Alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: We developed a 50-item instrument designed to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adults in the state of Qatar. The study involved 545 adult participants. In terms of content validity, our study showed a value of 0.92 for the scale-level content validity index based on the average and a value of 0.76 for the scale-level content validity index - universal agreement. In the EFA, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was calculated at 0.78, with statistical significance (P = 0.001). Regarding model fit indices of the seven-factor model, our findings showed an acceptable model-data-fit, with a relative chi-square: 1.7 (<3), Root mean square error of approximation: 0.05 (<0.08), PCLOSE = 0.41, Comparative fit index: 0.909, Tucker-Lewis index: 0.902, Incremental Fit Index: 0.910 and, Standardized Root mean square residual: 0.067 (<0.08). The seven-factor model of the questionnaire met the criterion of good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.73). Conclusion: This tool is deemed of methodological merits in terms of validity, reliability, and determining the underlying conceptual structure of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its associating factors.

Addressing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in rural communities: A case study in engaging trusted messengers to pivot and plan.

The pandemic declaration of COVID-19 in 2020 presented unique challenges, lessons, and opportunities for public health practice in the United States. Despite clear evidence of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness, vaccine uptake and vaccine confidence remained low in many regions. Vaccine holdouts, or those who are vaccine hesitant, have been an increasingly difficult population to reach. Several factors influence vaccine hesitancy and behavior in rural areas, including health care access challenges, misinformation, political loyalties, and concerns regarding the perceived lack of trustworthy evidence and knowledge of long-term effects. In March 2021, the Finger Lakes Rural Immunization Initiative (FLRII) engaged stakeholders to address vaccine hesitancy in a nine-county region of rural New York known as the Finger Lakes. Driven by data collected from community partners, physicians, and local health departments regarding their biggest barriers and greatest needs, the FLRII team created an interactive program for trusted messengers (TMs) including a stakeholder panel, called the Trusted Messenger Forum (TMF). The TMF met every 2 weeks from August 2021- August 2022 to engage local TMs and disseminate up-to-date knowledge in real time. During forum sessions, TMs shared detailed accounts of their experiences combating vaccine hesitancy in their communities and supported one another in their efforts through positive interaction and reaffirming conversations. Collaborations between community stakeholders can form a scaffolding to support a rapid response to a variety of public health problems and result in impactful change. For researchers implementing community-based research projects, modeling stakeholder panels after trusted messenger forums can be effective for diversifying the scope of the project and reacting to emergent problems in real-time.

"Community members have more impact on their neighbors than celebrities": leveraging community partnerships to build COVID-19 vaccine confidence.

BACKGROUND: Vaccines are a strong public health tool to protect against severe disease, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19. Still, inequities in COVID-19 vaccination rates and health outcomes continue to exist among Black and Latino populations. Boston Medical Center (BMC) has played a significant role in vaccinating medically underserved populations, and organized a series of community-engaged conversations to better understand community concerns regarding the COVID-19 vaccine. This paper describes the themes which resulted from these community-engaged conversations and proposes next steps for healthcare leaders. METHODS: We accessed nine publicly available recordings of the community-engaged conversations which were held between March 2021 and September 2021 and ranged from 8 to 122 attendees. Six conversations prioritized specific groups: the Haitian-Creole community, the Cape Verdean community, the Latino community, the Black Christian Faith community, guardians who care for children living with disabilities, and individuals affected by systemic lupus erythematosus. Remaining conversations targeted the general public of the Greater Boston Area. We employed a Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-driven codebook to code our data. Our analysis utilized a modified version of qualitative rapid analysis methods. RESULTS: Five main themes emerged from these community-engaged conversations: (1) Structural factors are important barriers to COVID-19 vaccination; (2) Mistrust exists due to the negative impact of systemic oppression and perceived motivation of the government; (3) There is a desire to learn more about biological and clinical characteristics of the COVID-19 vaccine as well as the practical implications of being vaccinated; (4) Community leaders emphasize community engagement for delivering COVID-19 information and education and; (5) Community leaders believe that the COVID-19 vaccine is a solution to address the pandemic. CONCLUSION: This study illustrates a need for community-engaged COVID-19 vaccine messaging which reflects the nuances of the COVID-19 vaccine and pandemic without oversimplifying information. In highlighting common concerns of the Greater Boston Area which contribute to a lack of confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine, we underscore important considerations for public health and healthcare leadership in the development of initiatives which work to advance health equity.

Confidence in COVID-19 vaccines moderates the association between vaccination status and mental distress.

Previous research has demonstrated that becoming vaccinated with the Coronavirus vaccine may lower mental distress. However, it remains uncertain whether this relationship holds amid concerns of vaccine side effects and doubts of the vaccine's protective capabilities. We presented three studies that showed how vaccine confidence negatively influences the relationship between vaccine uptake and mental distress. Using two-way fixed effects regression models, Study 1 analyzes longitudinal survey of respondents from Los Angeles County in the US, while Study 2 uses the same analytical strategy but generalises findings by analysing longitudinal data of participants across all 50 US states. Main results of both studies show that (i) vaccination uptake is linked with reduced mental distress among individuals with high vaccine confidence (ii) vaccine uptake has no effect on mental distress among individuals with low vaccine confidence. Lastly, Study 3 applies multilevel analysis to a large-scale pseudo-panel study of 15 developed countries. Results for the third study corroborate finding (i) but not (ii) in that the multinational study finds that vaccine uptake is actually associated with higher mental distress among individuals with low vaccine confidence. In sum, our paper shows that the palliative effect of vaccination on mental health only exists when vaccine confidence is high. Results are mixed on whether vaccination affects mental distress when individual vaccine confidence is low.

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.

State of Vaccine Hesitancy in the United States.

Although the term "vaccine hesitancy" has achieved great prominence, the extent to which US parents have reluctance, doubts, or indecision when it comes to vaccines recommended for children and how such hesitancy is manifest are unclear. A narrative review approach that placed emphasis on recent data and published work is used to surface evidence and insights into the current state of US parent vaccine hesitancy. The assessment finds evidence that ∼6% to 25% of parents may be vaccine hesitant, that hesitancy is higher for influenza and HPV vaccines, and there are indications that addressing parent hesitancy has become more challenging.

Confidence in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness and safety and its effect on vaccine uptake in Tanzania: A community-based cross-sectional study.

COVID-19 is a major public health threat associated with increased disease burden, mortality, and economic loss to countries and communities. Safe and efficacious COVID-19 vaccines are key in halting and reversing the pandemic. Low confidence in vaccines has been one of the factors leading to hesitancy. We aimed to assess the COVID-19 vaccine confidence (safety and effectiveness), associated factors, and its effects on vaccine uptake among general community members in Tanzania. This was a community-based cross-sectional survey conducted from December 2021 to April 2022 in six regions of Tanzania mainland and two regions in Zanzibar. Participants were interviewed using an electronic questionnaire. Multiple logistic regression models estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for factors associated with vaccine confidence. All analyses were performed using SPSS version 25.0. The study enrolled 3470 general Tanzanian community members; their mean age was 40.3 (standard deviation ±14.9) years, and 34% were males. The proportion of COVID-19 vaccine confidence was 54.6%. Geographical region, residence area, COVID-19 disease risk perception, and good knowledge of COVID-19 vaccines were significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccine confidence. Confidence in COVID-19 vaccines was associated with over three times higher odds of vaccine uptake. Confidence in COVID-19 vaccines was low in Tanzania. Innovative community engagement strategies and region-specific interventions are needed to improve comprehensive knowledge and address community perceptions and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy for children: A pilot assessment of parents in the United States.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy has remained a significant concern among adults worldwide. However, not much is known about parental vaccine hesitancy for getting children vaccinated for COVID-19 in the U.S. Thus, the purpose of this study was to conduct a national assessment of parents' preferences for COVID-19 vaccination of children using the evidence-based Multi-Theory Model (MTM) and explore the predictors of vaccine hesitancy. Methods: To participate in this study, a national random sample of parents (n=263) took a valid and reliable online questionnaire based on the MTM. Independent samples t test, chi-square test, multiple logistic regression was utilized to analyze data. Results: More than two-fifths (42%) of the participating parents were not willing to get their children vaccinated for COVID-19. Parental vaccination status, booster dose acceptance, education, and political affiliation were significant predictors of willingness to get children vaccinated for COVID-19. In the multiple logistic regression analyses, behavioral confidence and participatory dialogue (i.e., perceived advantages versus disadvantages) were statistically significant predictors of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy for children among the participating parents. Conclusion: Given the multiple factors that were found influential in parental hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccination among children, multimodal and evidence-based interventions are needed to increase the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among children by influencing the parents' perceptions, increasing their confidence, dispelling misinformation, and reducing constraints for vaccination. Such interventions should emphasize communication and messaging that is truthful, interactive, scientifically correct, and to be delivered in a variety of community-based settings.

Broad perspectives in understanding vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence: an introduction to the special issue.

The World Health Organization has designated vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence among the most pressing issues in global health. The COVID-19 pandemic has made vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence particularly salient and urgent. The purpose of this special issue is to highlight a broad range of perspectives on these critical issues. We have included a total of 30 papers that address issues related to vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence across multiple levels of the Socio-Ecological Model. We have organized the empirical papers into the following sections: individual-level beliefs, minority health and health disparities, social media and conspiracy beliefs, and interventions. In addition to the empirical papers, three commentaries are included in this special issue.