Responses to a COVID-19 vaccination intervention: Qualitative analysis of 17K unsolicited SMS replies.

The development of effective interventions for COVID-19 vaccination has proven challenging given the unique and evolving determinants of that behavior. A tailored intervention to drive vaccination uptake through machine learning-enabled personalization of behavior change messages unexpectedly yielded a high volume of real-time short message service (SMS) feedback from recipients. A qualitative analysis of those replies contributes to a better understanding of the barriers to COVID-19 vaccination and demographic variations in determinants, supporting design improvements for vaccination interventions. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine unsolicited replies to a text message intervention for COVID-19 vaccination to understand the types of barriers experienced and any relationships between recipient demographics, intervention content, and reply type. METHOD: We categorized SMS replies into 22 overall themes. Interrater agreement was very good (all κpooled > 0.62). Chi-square analyses were used to understand demographic variations in reply types and which messaging types were most related to reply types. RESULTS: In total, 10,948 people receiving intervention text messages sent 17,090 replies. Most frequent reply types were "already vaccinated" (31.1%), attempts to unsubscribe (25.4%), and "will not get vaccinated" (12.7%). Within "already vaccinated" and "will not get vaccinated" replies, significant differences were observed in the demographics of those replying against expected base rates, all p > .001. Of those stating they would not vaccinate, 34% of the replies involved mis-/disinformation, suggesting that a determinant of vaccination involves nonvalidated COVID-19 beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: Insights from unsolicited replies can enhance our ability to identify appropriate intervention techniques to influence COVID-19 vaccination behaviors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

How to Respond to Misinformation From the Anti-Vaccine Movement.

Vaccines are doubtlessly one of the most crucial life-saving medical interventions to date. However, perplexingly, they court more public controversy than their objectively excellent safety profile warrants. While doubts about the safety of vaccines, as well as opposition to vaccine policies, can be traced back at least to the mid-19th century, the modern anti-vaccine movement has come in 3 distinct waves, or generations, each precipitating around distinct key events. Here, we describe the first 2 generations and trace the origins of an emerging third generation anti-vaccine movement. Currently, this third generation is an integral part of the larger anti-COVID movement and in this more libertarian environment propagates the idea of individualism superseding the responsibility for community health. We highlight the need for a better science education of the young, as well as the general public to further enhance overall science literacy and suggests strategies to achieve these goals.

An Epidemic Model with Pro and Anti-vaccine Groups.

Here, an epidemiological model considering pro and anti-vaccination groups is proposed and analyzed. In this model, susceptible individuals can migrate between these two groups due to the influence of false and true news about safety and efficacy of vaccines. From this model, written as a set of three ordinary differential equations, analytical expressions for the disease-free steady state, the endemic steady state, and the basic reproduction number are derived. It is analytically shown that low vaccination rate and no influx to the pro-vaccination group have similar impacts on the long-term amount of infected individuals. Numerical simulations are performed with parameter values of the COVID-19 pandemic to illustrate the analytical results. The possible relevance of this work is discussed from a public health perspective.

Influence of online opinions and interactions on the Covid-19 vaccination in Chile.

We analyze 6 months of Twitter conversations related to the Chilean Covid-19 vaccination process, in order to understand the online forces that argue for or against it and suggest effective digital communication strategies. Using AI, we classify accounts into four categories that emerge from the data as a result of the type of language used. This classification naturally distinguishes pro- and anti-vaccine activists from moderates that promote or inhibit vaccination in discussions, which also play a key role that should be addressed by public policies. We find that all categories display relatively constant opinions, but that the number of tweeting accounts grows in each category during controversial periods. We also find that accounts disfavoring vaccination tend to appear in the periphery of the interaction network, which is consistent with Chile's high immunization levels. However, these are more active in addressing those favoring vaccination than vice-versa, revealing a potential communication problem even in a society where the antivaccine movement has no central role. Our results highlight the importance of social network analysis to understand public discussions and suggest online interventions that can help achieve successful immunization campaigns.

Anti-vaccination movements in the world and in Brazil.

Over the years, vaccinations have provided significant advances in public health, because they substantially reduce the morbimortality of vaccine-preventable diseases. Nevertheless, many people are still hesitant to be vaccinated. Brazil is a region of many anti-vaccine movements, and several outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases, such as yellow fever and measles, have occurred in the country during the last few years. To avoid new outbreaks, immunization coverage must be high; however, this is a great challenge to achieve due to the countless anti-vaccine movements. The World Health Organization has suggested new actions for the next decade via the Immunization Agenda 2030 to control, reduce, or eradicate vaccine-preventable diseases. Nonetheless, the vaccination coverage has decreased recently. To resolve the anti-vaccine issue, it is necessary to propose a long-term approach that involves innovative education programs on immunization and critical thinking, using different communication channels, including social media. Cooperation among biology and health scientists, ethicists, human scientists, policymakers, journalists, and civil society is essential for an in-depth understanding of the social action of vaccine refusal and planning effective education measures to increase the vaccine coverage.

Media attention and Vaccine Hesitancy: Examining the mediating effects of Fear of COVID-19 and the moderating role of Trust in leadership.

Vaccination has emerged as the most cost-effective public health strategy for maintaining population health, with various social and economic benefits. These vaccines, however, cannot be effective without widespread acceptance. The present study examines the effect of media attention on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy by incorporating fear of COVID-19 as a mediator, whereas trust in leadership served as a moderator. An analytical cross-sectional study is performed among rural folks in the Wassa Amenfi Central of Ghana. Using a questionnaire survey, we were able to collect 3079 valid responses. The Smart PLS was used to estimate the relationship among the variables. The results revealed that media attention had a significant influence on vaccine hesitancy. Furthermore, the results showed that fear of COVID-19 played a significant mediating role in the relationship between media and vaccine hesitancy. However, trust in leadership had an insignificant moderating relationship on the fear of COVID-19 and vaccine hesitancy. The study suggests that the health management team can reduce vaccine hesitancy if they focus on lessening the negative impact of media and other antecedents like fear on trust in leadership.

Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal [2022; Vol.28, Issue 3] / [المجلة الصحية لشرق المتوسط [2022; المجلد 28 , العدد 3

Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal is the official health journal published by the Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office of the World Health Organization. It is a forum for the presentation and promotion of new policies and initiatives in health services; and for the exchange of ideas concepts epidemiological data research findings and other information with special reference to the Eastern Mediterranean Region. It addresses all members of the health profession medical and other health educational institutes interested NGOs WHO Collaborating Centres and individuals within and outside the Region

المجلة الصحية لشرق المتوسط هى المجلة الرسمية التى تصدرعن المكتب الاقليمى لشرق المتوسط بمنظمة الصحة العالمية. وهى منبر لتقديم السياسات والمبادرات الجديدة فى الصحة العامة والخدمات الصحية والترويج لها، و لتبادل الاراء و المفاهيم والمعطيات الوبائية ونتائج الابحاث وغير ذلك من المعلومات، و خاصة ما يتعلق منها باقليم شرق المتوسط. وهى موجهة الى كل اعضاء المهن الصحية، والكليات الطبية وسائر المعاهد التعليمية، و كذا المنظمات غير الحكومية المعنية، والمراكز المتعاونة مع منظمة الصحة العالمية والافراد المهتمين بالصحة فى الاقليم و خارجه

La Revue de Santé de la Méditerranée Orientale est une revue de santé officielle publiée par le Bureau régional de l’Organisation mondiale de la Santé pour la Méditerranée orientale. Elle offre une tribune pour la présentation et la promotion de nouvelles politiques et initiatives dans le domaine de la santé publique et des services de santé ainsi qu’à l’échange d’idées de concepts de données épidémiologiques de résultats de recherches et d’autres informations se rapportant plus particulièrement à la Région de la Méditerranée orientale. Elle s’adresse à tous les professionnels de la santé aux membres des instituts médicaux et autres instituts de formation médico-sanitaire aux ONG Centres collaborateurs de l’OMS et personnes concernés au sein et hors de la Région.

Hashtag as a new weapon to resist the COVID-19 vaccination policy: a qualitative study of the anti-vaccine movement in Brazil, USA, and Indonesia.

In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) named the anti-vaccine movement one of the top 10 global health threats. This trend has shown that it can diminish public faith in government and increase public distrust of scientific results in the health sector, including the use of the COVID-19 vaccine. The purpose of this study is to examine the anti-vaccine movement on Twitter social media platform, which uses Hashtag to protest vaccination regulations in the COVID-19 pandemic. The content analysis, relationship analysis, and word cloud analysis models were used in this study, which used a descriptive qualitative approach. The primary data source for this study is Hashtag, which are used to focus on three aspects. First, establish which information in Brazil, the United States, and Indonesia leads the anti-vaccine COVID-19 narrative. Second, how does the Hashtag link between each country work? Third, which narrative dominates the use of Hashtag in each of the three countries? According to the findings of this study, in Brazil, 69.2% of Twitter Hashtag associated to the COVID-19 vaccination were negative, compared to 59.4% in the USA and 62.8% in Indonesia. In general, the Hashtag used in the three countries to oppose COVID-19 vaccination policies have a clear and significant relationship. In Brazil, the Hashtag #covidiots was the most popular, while in the United States, #covivaccine was the most popular, and in Indonesia, #antivaccine was the most popular.

Active pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine groups: Their group identities and attitudes toward science.

Vaccine rejection is a problem severely impacting the global society, especially considering the COVID-19 outbreak. The need to understand the psychological mechanisms underlying the active involvement of the pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine movements is therefore very important both from a theoretical and practical perspective. This paper investigates the group identities of people with positive and negative attitudes towards vaccination, and their attitudes toward general science. A targeted sample study of 192 pro-vaccine and 156 anti-vaccine group members showed that the group identity of pro-vaccine individuals is higher than of anti-vaccine individuals. and that both pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine individuals had a positive attitude toward science. Results are discussed in context of the heterogeneity of motivations causing vaccine rejection and the relation between active involvement in online discussion and group identity.

Assessing COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake and Effectiveness Through the North West London Vaccination Program: Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared SARS-CoV-2, causing COVID-19, as a pandemic. The UK mass vaccination program commenced on December 8, 2020, vaccinating groups of the population deemed to be most vulnerable to severe COVID-19 infection. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the early vaccine administration coverage and outcome data across an integrated care system in North West London, leveraging a unique population-level care data set. Vaccine effectiveness of a single dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines were compared. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study identified 2,183,939 individuals eligible for COVID-19 vaccination between December 8, 2020, and February 24, 2021, within a primary, secondary, and community care integrated care data set. These data were used to assess vaccination hesitancy across ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic deprivation measures (Pearson product-moment correlations); investigate COVID-19 transmission related to vaccination hubs; and assess the early effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination (after a single dose) using time-to-event analyses with multivariable Cox regression analysis to investigate if vaccination independently predicted positive SARS-CoV-2 in those vaccinated compared to those unvaccinated. RESULTS: In this study, 5.88% (24,332/413,919) of individuals declined and did not receive a vaccination. Black or Black British individuals had the highest rate of declining a vaccine at 16.14% (4337/26,870). There was a strong negative association between socioeconomic deprivation and rate of declining vaccination (r=-0.94; P=.002) with 13.5% (1980/14,571) of individuals declining vaccination in the most deprived areas compared to 0.98% (869/9609) in the least. In the first 6 days after vaccination, 344 of 389,587 (0.09%) individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The rate increased to 0.13% (525/389,243) between days 7 and 13, before then gradually falling week on week. At 28 days post vaccination, there was a 74% (hazard ratio 0.26, 95% CI 0.19-0.35) and 78% (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.18-0.27) reduction in risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 for individuals that received the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines, respectively, when compared with unvaccinated individuals. A very low proportion of hospital admissions were seen in vaccinated individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (288/389,587, 0.07% of all patients vaccinated) providing evidence for vaccination effectiveness after a single dose. CONCLUSIONS: There was no definitive evidence to suggest COVID-19 was transmitted as a result of vaccination hubs during the vaccine administration rollout in North West London, and the risk of contracting COVID-19 or becoming hospitalized after vaccination has been demonstrated to be low in the vaccinated population. This study provides further evidence that a single dose of either the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine or the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is effective at reducing the risk of testing positive for COVID-19 up to 60 days across all age groups, ethnic groups, and risk categories in an urban UK population.