RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: Vaccination is a process that involves individual, social, and ethical aspects, beyond public governance of vaccines or vaccination as a public health concern. The aim of this study is to describe the sociocultural and moral narratives that influence the decision to vaccinate in general and to vaccinate against COVID-19 specifically, among patients at the rheumatology units of two hospitals. METHODS: Qualitative study involving individual semi-structured interviews following an interview guide. We conducted a thematic analysis using the ATLAS.ti software, with further triangulation to verify concordance and aid in the interpretation of the data from a medical anthropology framework and using a narrative ethics approach to gain insight into the participants' underlying moral values. RESULTS: We interviewed 37 patients in total, along with 3 rheumatologists. Five core themes emerged from the analysis to understand the decision to vaccinate: (1) information about vaccines and disease, (2) perceived risk-benefit of vaccination, (3) the physician-patient relationship, (4) governance of vaccination programs, (5) attitudes towards vaccines. Individual and family experiences with vaccination are diverse depending on the type of vaccine. The COVID-19 vaccine, as a new medical technology, is met with more controversy leading to hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: The decision to vaccinate among Mexican rheumatic disease patients can sometimes involve doubt and distrust, especially for those with a lupus diagnosis, but ultimately there is acceptance in most cases. Though patients make and value autonomous decisions, there is a collective process involving sociocultural and ethical aspects. Key points ⢠The complexity of vaccine decision-making is better identified through a narrative, qualitative approach like the one used in this study, as opposed to solely quantitative approaches ⢠Sociocultural and moral perspectives of vaccination shape decision-making and, therefore, highlight the importance of including patients in the development of effective clinical practice guidelines as well as ethically justified public policy ⢠Sociohistorical context and personal experiences of immunization influence vaccine decision-making much more than access to biomedical information about vaccines, showing that approaches based on the information deficit model are inadequate to fight vaccine hesitancy.