ABSTRACT
Background: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) poses expectant mothers to a higher risk of serious complications and mortality. Following a risk-benefit review, a number of governmental and professional bodies from across the globe recently approved the COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. Aim(s): This study aimed to investigate knowledge, actual acceptance, and concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine among the obstetric population. Material(s) and Method(s): Participants were selected from among the expecting women who came for antenatal checkup during the study period (October 1, 2021-November 30, 2021). About 150 pregnant women who met the inclusion criteria and consented were recruited into the study. Data related to socio-demographic and clinical characteristics as well as knowledge, actual acceptance, and concerns about COVID-19 vaccine were collected through in-person interviews using a prestructured questionnaire. The SPSS version 23 was used to analyze data. The association between the attitude (acceptance and hesitance) of participants toward the COVID-19 vaccine and their sociodemographic and clinical profile was found by Fisher's exact test. Result(s): The actual acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine among expecting women was 52.0%. The primary motive for accepting COVID-19 immunization was to protect the fetus, followed by the protection of one's own health. A significant association was found between COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and the level of education, socio-economic status, and presence of comorbidities. The leading causes for vaccine reluctance were concerns about the efficacy and safety of the vaccines and lack of awareness about their usage during pregnancy. Conclusion(s): Multifaceted activities are required to promote the effectiveness and safety profile of the COVID-19 vaccine as well as disseminate knowledge about its usage during pregnancy. Clinical significance: Unlike numerous other studies that have investigated the accepting attitude only, the present one has investigated the actual COVID-19 vaccine uptake among the obstetric population.Copyright © The Author(s).
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Vaccines are one of the most important weapons in protection against diseases, especially pandemics lacking available treatment. The objective of this study was to investigate the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of individuals presenting to family medicine polyclinics for COVID-19 and influenza vaccines. METHOD(S): The cross-sectional descriptive study comprised healthy individuals who presented to family medicine polyclinics in Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye between 10 December 2020 and 31 January 2021. Data on participants' knowledge and attitudes for COVID-19 and influenza vaccines were collected through questionnaire surveys. In total, 521 individuals aged older than 18 years were included in the study. RESULT(S): If a COVID-19 vaccine were available, 34.4% (N.=179) of respondents would be vaccinated, and 35.3% (N.=184) of respondents would not consider vaccination. Of those considering COVID-19 vaccination, 55.3% (N.=99) of respondents deemed the vaccine an effective way of providing protection against the virus. Increased willingness to have the COVID-19 vaccine was associated with the following factors: considering the influenza vaccine an effective protection method (P<0.001), a history of influenza vaccination (P=0.003), and concern about COVID-19 related death rates (P=0.008). CONCLUSION(S): The most common reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and refusal were fear of vaccine-related side effects and a lack of perceived research evidence on the vaccine. Having a positive view of the influenza vaccine had a positive impact on attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine.Copyright © 2022 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patients with cancer are at a higher risk of severe forms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and mortality. Therefore, widespread COVID-19 vaccination is required to attain herd immunity. Objective(s): We aimed to evaluate the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in Indian patients with cancer and to collect information regarding vaccine hesitancy and factors that contributed to vaccine hesitancy. Material(s) and Method(s): This was a questionnaire-based survey conducted between May 7, 2021 and June 10, 2021 in patients aged 45 years and over, with solid tumors. The primary end points of the study were the proportion of Indian patients with cancer aged 45 years and older who had not received the COVID-19 vaccine, and the reasons why these patients had not received the COVID-19 vaccine. Our secondary end points were the proportion of patients with a history of COVID-19 infection, and the proportion of the patients who had vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, we attempted to assess the factors that could impact vaccine hesitancy. Result(s): A total of 435 patients were included in the study. Of these, 348 (80%) patients had not received even a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine;66 (15.2%) patients had received the first dose, and 21 (4.8%) had received both the doses. Approximately half (47.1%) of the patients reported that they took the COVID-19 vaccine based on the advice from a doctor. The reasons for not taking the COVID-19 vaccine could be considered as vaccine hesitancy in 259 (77%) patients. The two most common reasons were fear in 124 (38%) patients (fear of side-effects and of the impact of the vaccine on the cancer/therapy) and lack of information in 87 (26.7%) patients. On the multivariate analysis, the two factors found to be significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy were a lower educational level (OR, 1.78;95% CI, 1-3.17;P = 0.048) and a lack of prior advice regarding the COVID-19 vaccine (OR, 2.80;95% CI, 1.73-4.53;P < 0.001). Conclusion(s): Vaccine hesitancy is present in over half of our patients, and the most common reasons are a fear of the vaccine impacting the cancer therapy, fear of side-effects, and lack of information. Widespread vaccination can only be attained if systematic programs for education and dissemination of information regarding the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine are given as much importance as fortification of the vaccination supply and distribution system.Copyright © 2021 Cancer Research, Statistics, and Treatment Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow.
ABSTRACT
This article starts with a case outlining ethical challenges encountered in participatory action research (PAR) on vaccine hesitancy in rural India during Covid-19. Community researchers were recruited by a not-for-profit organisation, with the aim of both discovering the reasons for vaccine hesitancy and encouraging take-up. This raised issues about the roles and responsibilities of local researchers in their own communities, where they might be blamed for adverse reactions to vaccination. They and their mentor struggled with balancing societal protection against individual rights to make choices. These themes are explored in two commentaries discussing the difficulties in balancing ethics in public health (prioritising societal benefits), social research (protecting participants from harm and respecting their rights not to be involved) and participatory research practices (maximising democratic participation and decision-making). As discussed in the first commentary, often these cohere, but tensions can arise. The second commentary also raises the issue of epistemic justice, questioning the extent to which the villagers could have a say in the design, implementation and interpretation of the research, and the dangers of not hearing the voices and arguments of people who reject vaccination. The case and commentaries highlight the complexities of PAR and additional challenges in a public health context.
ABSTRACT
Background: Of all teenage deaths caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), 47% occurred in children aged 0-9. Like many other infectious diseases, reducing mortality in children requires widespread vaccination. Despite the availability of the COVID-19 vaccine, a large percentage of children have not received the vaccine. Objective(s): This survey aimed to study parents' reluctance to receive the COVID-19 vaccine for their children in Shiraz, Iran. Method(s): An online questionnaire was sent to parents whose 5 to 11-year-old children had received no COVID-9 vaccine through the health educators of primary schools in Shiraz, Iran. The questionnaire contained demographic questions and 16 beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination that were answered as yes/no. Result(s): We assessed 1093 respondents, including 49.5% (n = 542) male and 50.5% female students' parents. The mean number of wrong beliefs was 7.21 +/- 2.80 in parents who had boys and 7.78 +/- 2.95 in girls' parents. Also, 78.6% of participants had at least five wrong beliefs or excuses for not vaccinating their children. Notably, 82.8% of mothers and 84.3% of fathers were vaccinated with 2-3 doses against COVID-19. The most common wrong beliefs were probable vaccines' side effects in the future, the undesirable effect of vaccination on children's growth, and the awful effect of the vaccine on fertility, with a prevalence of 82.7%, 81.2%, and 76.7%, respectively. Conclusion(s): This study identified that most participants believed that COVID-19 vaccines have side effects for their children and unfavorable effects on children's growth and infertility.Copyright © 2023, Author(s).
ABSTRACT
Background: COVID-19 vaccine is one of the most effective public health intervention approaches for prevention of COVID-19. Despite its well-known efficacy and safety, significant proportion of frontline COVID-19 healthcare workers remain hesitant about accepting the vaccine for whatever reasons. This study aimed to determine acceptance rate and determinants of vaccine refusal among doctors in Cross River State, Nigeria. Methodology: This was a cross-sectional survey of doctors using structured online questionnaire administered via the WhatsApp platform of the medical doctors' association, in order to assess their rate of acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines, and reasons for vaccine refusal. The predictors of vaccine acceptance were analysed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Result(s): Of the 443 medical doctors targeted on the WhatsApp platform, 164 responded to the questionnaire survey, giving a response rate of 37.0% (164/443). The mean age of the respondents is 38 +/-6.28 years, 91 (55.5%) are 38 years old and above, 97 (59.1%) are males and 67 (40.9%) are females, giving a male-to-female ratio of 1.4:1. The greater proportion of the respondents are physicians (70/148, 47.3%) and about three-quarter of the participants (127/164, 77.4%) had received COVID-19 vaccine. The proportion of physicians who had received COVID-19 vaccine (57/70, 81.4%) was more than the proportion of general practitioners (31/42, 73.8%) and surgeons (24/35, 68.6%). Low perceived benefit of vaccination was the main reason given for COVID-19 vaccine refusal (45.9%, 17/37). No significant association was found between vaccine refusal and suspected predictors (p>0.05). Conclusion(s): Our study revealed high rate of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among medical doctors especially among the physicians, with the surgeons showing lowest acceptance rate. A significant proportion would not take vaccine because they perceived it lacks much benefits. To raise vaccine acceptance among doctors, more efforts on vaccine literacy that would target doctors from all sub-specialties especially surgeons and incorporate vaccine benefits should be made.Copyright 2023 AJCEM Open Access. This article is licensed and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attrition 4.0 International License <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/", which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided credit is given to the original author(s) and the source. Editor-in-Chief: Prof. S. S. Taiwo.
ABSTRACT
Despite being a major threat to health, vaccine hesitancy (i.e., refusal or reluctance to vaccinate despite vaccine availability) is on the rise. Using a longitudinal cohort of young adults (N=1260) from Los Angeles County, California we investigated the neurobehavioral mechanisms underlying COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Data were collected at two time points: during adolescence (12th grade;fall 2016;average age = 16.96 (±0.42)) and during young adulthood (spring 2021;average age = 21.33 (±0.49)). Main outcomes and measures were delay discounting (DD;fall 2016) and tendency to act rashly when experiencing positive and negative emotions (UPPS-P;fall 2016);self-reported vaccine hesitancy and vaccine beliefs/knowledge (spring 2021). A principal components analysis determined four COVID-19 vaccine beliefs/knowledge themes: Collective Responsibility, Confidence and Risk Calculation, Complacency, and Convenience. Significant relationships were found between themes, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, and DD. Collective Responsibility (β=-1.158[-1.213,-1.102]) and Convenience (β=-0.132[-0.185,-0.078]) scores were negatively associated, while Confidence and Risk Calculation (β=0.283[0.230,0.337]) and Complacency (β=0.412[0.358,0.466]) scores were positively associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, Collective Responsibility (β=-0.060[-0.101,-0.018]) was negatively associated, and Complacency (β=-0.063[0.021,0.105]) was positively associated with DD from fall 2016. Mediation analysis revealed immediacy bias during adolescence, measured by DD, predicted vaccine hesitancy 4 years later while being mediated by two types of vaccine beliefs/knowledge: Collective Responsibility (β=0.069[0.022,0.116]) and Complacency (β=0.026[0.008,0.044]). These findings provide a further understanding of individual vaccine-related decision-making among young adults and inform public health messaging to increase vaccination acceptance.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To increase vaccine awareness, we aimed to determine individuals' knowledge and behavioral approach to the COVID-19 vaccine.Methods: The data of this cross-sectional study were obtained online between June and July 31, 2021. One thousand one hundred seventy-six people over the age of 18 were included in the study. The researchers developed a data collec-tion form consisting of 27 questions. Mean +/- standard deviation and median (1st quarter-3rd quarter) values, numbers, and percentages were used to summarize the data. Chi-square (chi 2) test was used to show the relationship between categorical variables. Independent predictors of participants' vaccine hesitancy/rejection were analyzed using logistic regression. Statistically, data withp<0.05 were considered significant.Results: A total of 1176 people, 55.7% of whom were women, with a mean age of 39.75 +/- 11.27 years, were included in the study. 71.6% of the participants were married, and 78.9% had a university/postgraduate degree. 9.7% of the partic-ipants stated that they were hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine, and 7.1% refused the COVID-19 vaccine or would not be vaccinated when it was their turn. According to the logistic regression model established to examine the factors that may affect vaccine rejection;Age, the resources used to obtain information about the vaccine, the thought that it would not protect for two years, or the vaccine side effects were high, and the most effective way to get rid of the pan-demic was not vaccination, were determined as the factors affecting vaccine rejection.Conclusion: As a result of the research, it was found that the participants had a positive attitude towards the COVID-19 vaccine. It was determined that 9.7% of the study group had vaccine hesitancy, and 7.1% had vaccine rejection.
ABSTRACT
Background: Phase III trials, corroborated by early post-marketing data globally show that COVID-19 vaccination reduces the risk of severe disease, hospitalisation and death. Despite this, vaccine hesitancy persists amongst some healthcare workers. This study aimed to assess the acceptability of the COVID-19 vaccine amongst South African pharmacists and highlight vaccine-related concerns and predictors of vaccination hesitancy.Methods: Nested within an online survey (14 April 2021 to 18 May 2021) assessing the mental health of South African pharmacists during the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccine acceptability and vaccine-related concerns were studied. A multivariate logistic regression analysis identified factors associated with vaccine hesitancy.Results: From 2 454 registered South African pharmacists sampled, 755 responded to the vaccine acceptability survey (response rate: 30.8%). Vaccine acceptability was 71.9%, while 72.4% and 53.3% were concerned about serious COVID-19 vaccine-related side effects and the lack of vaccine safety data, respectively. Pharmacists aged 20-30 years were more likely to be vaccine-hesitant compared to those aged > 60 years (aOR 3.2, 95% CI 1.1-9.6). Compared to their Caucasian colleagues, Black/African pharmacists were twice as likely to be vaccine-hesitant (aOR2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.0).Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among South African pharmacists exists amongst a small but significant proportion. Targeted interventions to address concerns are necessary.
ABSTRACT
Background: During the pandemic, nursing students continued their professional practice course face-to-face. Nursing students were included in the priority group in vaccination. There are hesitations about the COVID-19 vaccine against these important developments. Objectives: It is aimed to determine the reasons for nursing students who do not want to be vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: The universe of the study, which was designed in the type of descriptive phenomenology, which is one of the qualitative research methods, consists of 31 nursing students who took the last year professional practice course and did not receive the COVID-19 vaccine. When the data reached saturation, the interviews were terminated and 11 people formed the sample of the study. In-depth individual interviews were conducted with the unstructured interview form arranged according to the Health Belief Model. Themes were created by writing the recorded voice transcripts and making content analysis. Results: Six of the participants are women, and the median age is 22.0. Students did not receive seasonal flu vaccination. All of them actively use social media. Codes were made in line with the interviews, and 18 sub-themes and 6 main themes were determined. Not trusting the vaccine, side effects of the vaccine, thinking that one will not get sick, the vaccine is not native, getting information from current sources, taking personal protective measures are the main themes of this study. Conclusion: The focus of the students' decision not to vaccinate was determined as their negative attitudes towards vaccine trust. © 2023, Dokuz Eylul University. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Background: Since it was declared a global pandemic in March 2020, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has claimed over one million lives in the United States. Since COVID-19 vaccine rollout efforts began in Baltimore City, Maryland in December 2020, approximately 63.4% of all residents have been fully vaccinated (i.e., received their first and second doses in a two-dose series or received a single-dose vaccine). Despite efforts to implement equitable vaccine distribution in Baltimore City, prominent disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake persist, with poorer, predominantly Black neighborhoods frequently reporting lower levels of vaccine uptake than affluent, predominantly White neighborhoods. Guided by key principles of community-based participatory research, this dissertation explores community experiences with COVID-19 vaccines and develops a core outcome set (COS), inclusive of community-important outcomes, for use in studies evaluating the safety, efficacy, and implementation of COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: In March 2022, semi-structured interviews were held with vaccinated and unvaccinated Black residents of a community in Baltimore City reporting 40% vaccination uptake. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis with subsequent subgroup analyses and thematic network analyses. To assess the extent to which outcomes measured in COVID-19 vaccine studies published between December 2019 and March 2022 aligned with factors of vaccine hesitancy, a systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted. Results from the qualitative analyses and the SLR informed the development of a candidate list of outcomes used in the first round of a Delphi study held in June 2020. After two rounds of Delphi survey distribution, a face-to-face consensus meeting was held with community members and community health workers to prioritize outcomes of interest to all relevant stakeholders and finalize the COS. Results: Thematic analysis yielded four emergent themes relating to COVID-19 vaccine uptake decision making: (I) Safety and efficacy of vaccines, (II) Perceived importance of COVID-19 vaccines in relation to pre-existing community needs, divided into two subthemes, a) Environmental injustice and (b) Personal health concerns, (III) Access to trustworthy, understandable information, and (IV) Physical access to vaccines. Participants acknowledged that physical access to COVID-19 vaccines was not a major barrier to uptake, however finding trustworthy and understandable information about the safety and efficacy of the vaccines were common areas of concern. Of all primary outcomes (N=20) identified in the 56 articles included in the SLR, 85% (n=17) corresponded with factors of vaccine hesitancy. The final COS included 19 outcomes across four "domains:" "Is the vaccine safe?";"Does the vaccine work in my body?";"Does the vaccine work in the community?";and "Outcomes identified during consensus meeting." Conclusion: The findings from this dissertation suggest that although community-important outcomes related to safety and efficacy of vaccines are often addressed in clinical studies, outcomes measuring institutional trust, economic and health impacts, community acceptance of the vaccines, and trustworthiness of vaccine information are underutilized in studies of vaccine implementation. As these social factors function as barriers to vaccine uptake, particularly among underserved communities, they should be regarded as indicators of equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines. The findings from this dissertation provide a framework with which public health researchers can begin to rethink measures of equity in vaccine rollout efforts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to examine the factors that influence vaccination options, including vaccination against COVID-19, in order to develop a management algorithm for decision-makers to reduce vaccination reluctance. This paper's primary objective is to empirically determine the relationships between different variables that correlate to non-vaccination behavior of the target population, as well as the implications for public health and situational management strategies for future vaccination intentions. We created a questionnaire to investigate the personal approach to disease prevention measures in general and vaccination in particular. Using SmartPLS, load factors for developing an algorithm to manage vaccination reluctance were calculated. The results shows that the vaccination status of an individual is determined by their vaccine knowledge. The evaluation of the vaccine itself influences the choice not to vaccinate. There is a connection between external factors influencing the decision not to vaccinate and the clients' motives. This plays a substantial part in the decision of individuals not to protect themselves by vaccination. External variables on the decision not to vaccinate correlate with agreement/disagreement on COVID-19 immunization, but there is no correlation between online activity and outside influences on vaccination refusal or on vaccine opinion in general.
ABSTRACT
U.S. print news coverage of Covid vaccine hesitancy represents a departure from previous depictions of vaccine skepticism as a problem of wrong belief. This article reports on a mixed methods study of 334 New York Times texts about Covid nonvaccination and vaccine hesitancy published between December 2020–December 2021. Texts were analyzed for common themes and compared with prior media depictions of vaccine skepticism. Findings show that texts published during phased Covid vaccine distribution framed nonvaccination as a response to structural inequities, while later texts returned to blaming individuals for their hesitancy. These findings attest to the durability of individualistic framings of health while also illustrating possibilities of alternative frames. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Written Communication is the property of Sage Publications Inc. 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.)
ABSTRACT
Vaccine hesitancy is a complex issue with psychological, cultural, and even societal factors entangled in the decision-making process. The narrative around this process is captured in our everyday interactions;social media data offer a direct and spontaneous view of peoples' argumentation. Here, we analysed more than 500,000 public posts and comments from Facebook Pages dedicated to the topic of vaccination to study the role of moral values and, in particular, the understudied role of the Liberty moral foundation from the actual user-generated text. We operationalise morality by employing the Moral Foundations Theory, while our proposed framework is based on recurrent neural network classifiers with a short memory and entity linking information. Our findings show that the principal moral narratives around the vaccination debate focus on the values of Liberty, Care, and Authority. Vaccine advocates urge compliance with the authorities as prosocial behaviour to protect society. On the other hand, vaccine sceptics mainly build their narrative around the value of Liberty, advocating for the right to choose freely whether to adhere or not to the vaccination. We contribute to the automatic understanding of vaccine hesitancy drivers emerging from user-generated text, providing concrete insights into the moral framing around vaccination decision-making. Especially in emergencies such as the Covid-19 pandemic, contrary to traditional surveys, these insights can be provided contemporary to the event, helping policymakers craft communication campaigns that adequately address the concerns of the hesitant population. © 2023 ACM.
ABSTRACT
The novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presents a major threat to public health but can be prevented by safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccine acceptance among healthcare workers (HCWs) is essential to promote uptake. This study, aimed to determine the COVID-19 vaccination uptake and hesitancy and its associated factors among HCWs in Tanzania. We employed a convergent-parallel mixed-methods design among 1368 HCWs across health facilities in seven geographical zones in Tanzania in 2021. We collected quantitative data by using an interviewer-administered questionnaire and qualitative data, using in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. Participants in the quantitative aspect were conveniently selected whereas those in the qualitative aspect were purposively selected based on their role in patient care, management, and vaccine provision. Stata software version 16.1 was used in the analysis of quantitative data and thematic analysis for the qualitative data. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. The median age of 1368 HCWs was 33, and the interquartile range was 28–43 years;65.6% were aged 30+ years, and 60.1% were females. Over half (53.4%) of all HCWs received the COVID-19 vaccine, 33.6% completely refused, and 13% chose to wait. HCWs aged 40+ years, from lower-level facilities (district hospitals and health centers), who worked 6+ years, and with perceived high/very high risk of COVID-19 infection had significantly higher odds of vaccine uptake. The qualitative data revealed misinformation and inadequate knowledge about COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy as the key barriers to uptake. Nearly half of all HCWs in Tanzania are still unvaccinated against COVID-19. The predominance of contextual influence on COVID-19 vaccine uptake calls for interventions to focus on addressing contextual determinants, focusing on younger HCWs' population, short working duration, those working at different facility levels, and providing adequate vaccine knowledge. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of COVID is the property of MDPI 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.)