An Experimental Study on how Messaging from CDC Affects Attitudes toward Mandatory MMR Vaccination for Schoolchildren.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, public health institutions, particularly the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), were frequently attacked by politicians. Popular trust in these institutions declined, particularly among self-identified Republicans. Therefore, the effectiveness of public health institutions as vaccination messengers might have been weakened in the post-COVID-19 period. We conducted a survey experiment examining the effectiveness of messaging from the CDC in shaping people's attitudes toward mandatory MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccination for schoolchildren. METHODS: The experiment was embedded in a survey fielded in South Dakota, a "red state" with a population predisposed to distrust the CDC. Using registration-sampling, we received 747 responses. We used difference-in-means tests and multivariate regression to analyze the data. RESULTS: We found that participants who received a message from the CDC were more likely to support MMR vaccine mandate for schoolchildren than participants who received the same prompt from a state agency. Further analyses showed that messaging from the CDC was particularly effective among Republicans. DISCUSSION: Overall, our study showed that although the CDC was caught up in the political skirmishes during the COVID-19 pandemic, it remains an authoritative source of public health information. CONCLUSIONS: Public health officials at the local and state levels should not shy away from referring to the CDC in their vaccination messaging.

Attitudes toward annual COVID-19 boosters are highly structured by partisan self-identification and trust in government: Evidence from a longitudinal survey.

Objectives: On January 26, 2023, an advisory panel of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a plan for annual vaccination for COVID-19. Given slowing booster uptake in the US, full participation of the public is in doubt. Using data from a longitudinal survey, we investigated the predictors of attitudes toward receiving a COVID-19 booster dose annually. Study design: In February 2023, we completed a panel study of 243 adults from South Dakota who indicated being at least fully vaccinated in a survey conducted in May 2022. Methods: In addition to attitudes on an annual booster, we measured partisan self-identification, trust in government, interpersonal trust, COVID-19 vaccination status, age, gender, education, and income. We examined the effect of changes in COVID-19 vaccination status, and the two trust variables on the willingness to receive a COVID-19 booster dose annually. Results: Logistic regression analysis results showed statistically significant relationships between partisan self-identification, changes in trust in government and COVID-19 vaccination status, age, and the willingness to receive a COVID-19 booster dose annually. Conclusions: The findings underscore the continued relevance of partisan self-identification and trust in government on attitudes toward COVID-19 mitigation measures.

Partisan self-identification predicts attitudes of South Dakota nurses toward COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers.

Objectives: Nurses are at greater risk of infection from COVID-19. However, mistrust of the vaccine exists even among this group. In the United States, the government implemented a vaccine mandate for health care workers to increase vaccination rates. This study investigated the drivers of nurses' attitudes toward the mandate. Methods: We fielded a survey to study the attitudes of nurses toward COVID-19 vaccine mandate for HCWs. We contacted nurses in South Dakota, United States, based on the information from the South Dakota Board of Nursing. The survey was open in June and July 2022. We conducted a multivariate regression analysis to identify the factors that predict attitudes toward this regulation. Results: We received 1,084 responses. Results of regression analysis showed statistically significant relationships between partisan self-identification, evangelical identity, gender, and COVID-19 vaccination status and support for COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers. Age, time with patients, positive COIVD-19 test in the last year, education, and nurse classification variables were not statistically significant. Conclusions: The same factors that drive people's attitudes toward COVID-19 mitigation policies also explain nurses' attitudes toward a vaccine mandate for healthcare workers. The politicization of the COVID-19 pandemic is present also among nurses. Health care officials should be mindful of the influence of these biases as they evaluate the vaccine mandate and develop new regulations.

Predictors of older adults' attitudes toward various COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

Governments are considering adopting various COVID-19 vaccine mandates to protect the most vulnerable groups from infection. We conducted a panel survey of 240 adults aged 65 years or older in April 2021 and April 2022 on their attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine mandates for all adults, adults 65 and older, and health care workers. Results of a series of logistic regression models show that partisan self-identification is central in predicting attitudes of older adults toward these mandates. The findings of our study will be of relevance for decision-makers as they craft policies to protect the most vulnerable groups in society.

Attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine mandate: The role of psychological characteristics and partisan self-identification.

Governments around the world are increasingly considering vaccine mandates to curb the spread of COVID-19. In May 2022, we surveyed 394 residents of South Dakota to examine predictors of popular attitudes toward a COVID-19 vaccine mandate. We investigated the role of Big Five personality traits, right-wing authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation, as well as partisan self-identification, evangelical identity, and COVID-19 vaccination status. Results showed that Big Five personality traits (openness and emotional stability), right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, evangelical identity, and partisan self-identification are linked to attitudes toward a COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Our findings underscore the politicization of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the impact of dispositional factors on attitudes toward mandatory COVID-19 vaccination.

Drivers of COVID-19 booster uptake among nurses.

BACKGROUND: Nurses are at the forefront of efforts to contain COVID-19 and are thus at greater risk of infection from the virus than the general population. Unlike the initial vaccination, booster vaccinations are not always required, and some nurses have not received a booster shot. We investigate the predictors of booster uptake among nurses. METHODS: We developed an original survey to study booster uptake among nurses. Using contact information from the South Dakota Board of Nursing, we contacted nurses in South Dakota in June and July of 2022. We conducted a multivariate logistic regression to analyze the data. RESULTS: One thousand eighty-four nurses participated in our study. We found booster uptake among nurses was associated with their partisan self-identification (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.31-0.52), age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.05), flu vaccination last season (OR 5.61, 95% CI 2.6-12.1), and positive COVID-19 test in last 12 months (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35-0.74). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that COVID-19 booster uptake has been politicized even among nurses. As public health officials continue devising interventions to increase booster uptake among healthcare workers, they should be mindful that they would be viewed through the partisan lens.

Political Partisanship and Trust in Government Predict Popular Support for COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates for Various Professions and Demographic Groups: A Research Note.

Due to the slow rate of COVID-19 vaccine uptake and the spread of the highly contagious Omicron variant, governments are considering mandating COVID-19 vaccination for specific professions and demographic groups. This study evaluates popular attitudes toward such policies. We fielded a survey of 535 registered voters in South Dakota to examine popular attitudes towards vaccine mandates for five groups-children 12 and older, K-12 teachers, medical staff, nursing homes staff, and police personnel. We estimated a series of logistic regression models and presented predicted probabilities to find the primary determinants of these attitudes. Results revealed that political partisanship and trust in government are strong predictors of support for vaccine mandates across all models. Should government and public health officials wish to increase the proportion of people vaccinated for COVID-19, they must recognize the limitations of current public health campaigns, and reshape their efforts in congruence with scientific findings.

Reminders of existing vaccine mandates increase support for a COVID-19 vaccine mandate: Evidence from a survey experiment.

BACKGROUND: Governments are trying various strategies to boost COVID-19 vaccination rates, including vaccine mandates. Popular support for such mandates, however, is in flux in many countries, including the United States. The objective of this study is to evaluate if the wording of public health messages could increase popular support for COVID-19 vaccine mandates. METHODS: We conducted a survey experiment on a sample of 573 registered voters in South Dakota, United States. Participants in the control group (n = 271) read a short message about mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. Respondents in the treatment group (n = 278) read the same message but they were reminded that a variety of vaccine mandates for measles, mumps, rubella, and polio have long been required. Afterwards, both groups were asked about their support for COVID-19 vaccine mandate. RESULTS: A multivariate ordinary least squares regression analysis revealed that the experimental treatment had a positive and statistically significant impact on support for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination (p < 0.001). We also found that COVID-19 vaccination status, religious identity, and political affiliation have a statistically significant effect. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that a simple intervention-reminding the public of the existing vaccine mandates-increases support for COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Public health authorities who seek to boost COVID-19 vaccination rates could utilize this approach.

Trust in physicians and trust in government predict COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

Objective: We consider how trust in government, trust in physicians, and interpersonal trust affect the likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Methods: A survey of 3057 registered South Dakota voters was fielded in April 2021 that measured COVID-19 vaccine uptake, three aspects of trust, and several other factors related to vaccine hesitancy. Logistic regression was utilized to analyze the responses. Results: We found positive, statistically significant, and substantively impactful effects for trust in government and trust in physicians on the likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine uptake, and null results for interpersonal trust. Conclusions: Our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between trust and COVID-19 vaccine uptake, and suggest that public health official as well as physicians should strive to increase the public's trust in the medical community.

Pharmacists to partner with religious leaders to overcome vaccine hesitancy among Christians.

As pharmacists work to increase vaccine confidence and continued uptake, it is recommended to partner with trusted leaders to communicate these important messages. Evidence exists that religious leaders are effective messengers when it comes to encouraging coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination. Motivational interviewing employs empathy and reflective listening to promote self-change and is used to overcome vaccine hesitancy. Pharmacists are advised to work with religious leaders in their communities to reach the most vaccine-hesitant population through the shared resource of motivational interviewing. Pharmacists can refer interested religious leaders to available online resources to learn more about this effective tool.

Typologies of Party Finance Systems: A Comparative Study of How Countries Regulate Party Finance and Their Institutional Foundations.

This study catalogues party finance laws in multiple countries and identifies institutional factors that correspond to laws countries choose to adopt. Using data from international sources, we assessed differences in the regulation of money in elections in over 120 states. We classified countries into four types of party finance regimes along two axes: one that reflects regulations affecting party income and a second that reflects rules intended to make party finance more transparent. We found that two institutional factors are associated with the extent of government regulation in financing politics: the type of legal system and the use of proportional representation. Our study provides a new conceptual framework to categorize party finance regimes based on various types of regulations and the linkages between institutional factors and the extent of regulation. This conceptual typology offers a method to assess relationships between finance systems and political outcomes.