"I try to take all the time needed, even if i do not have it!": Knowledge, attitudes, practices of perinatal care providers in canada about vaccination.

Objective: Successful clinical conversations about vaccination in pregnancy (pertussis, COVID-19, and influenza) are key to improving low uptake rates of both vaccination in pregnancy and infancy. The purpose of this study was to understand Canadian perinatal care providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices around vaccination in pregnancy. Methods: Qualitative interviews with 49 perinatal care providers (nurse practitioner, general practitioner, registered nurse, registered midwife, obstetrician-gynecologist, and family physicians) in 6 of 13 provinces and territories were deductively coded using directed content analysis [1] and analyzed according to key themes. Results: Participants detailed their professional training and experiences, patient community demographics, knowledge of vaccines, views and beliefs about vaccination in pregnancy, and attitudes about vaccine counselling. Providers generally described having a good range of information sources to keep vaccine knowledge up to date. Some providers lacked the necessary logistical setups to administer vaccines within their practice. Responses suggest diverging approaches to vaccine counselling. With merely hesitant patients, some opted to dig in and have more in-depth discussions, while others felt the likelihood of persuading an outright vaccine-refusing patient to vaccinate was too low to be worthwhile. Conclusion: Provider knowledge, attitudes, and practices around vaccination varied by professional background. To support perinatal providers' knowledge and practices, clinical guidelines should detail the importance of vaccination relative to other care priorities, emphasize the positive impact of engaging hesitant patients in vaccine counselling.

Biopharmaceutical Financialization and Public Funding of Medical Countermeasures (MCMs) in Canada During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Analysing the Canadian government's efforts to support the development of COVID-19 "medical countermeasures" (MCMs), this article seeks insights into political economy as a driver of pandemic response. We explore whether Canadian public funding policy during the pandemic involved departures from established practices of financialisation in biopharmaceutical research and development (R&D), including the dominance of private sector involvement in an intellectual property (IP) intensive approach to innovation underscoring profit, and governance opacity. METHODS: We interrogate public funding for MCMs by analyzing how much the Government of Canada (GoC) spent, how those funds were allocated, on what terms, and to whom. We identify the funding institutions, and the funds awarded between February 10, 2020, and March 31, 2021, to support the research, development, and manufacturing of MCMs, including diagnostics, vaccines, therapeutics, and information about clinical management and virus transmission. To collect these data, we conducted searches on the Internet, public data repositories, and filed several requests under the Access to Information Act (1985). Subsequently, we carried out a document-based analysis of electronically accessible research contracts, proposals, grant calls, and policy announcements. RESULTS: The GoC announced CAD$ 1.4 billion for research, development and manufacturing of COVID-19 MCMs. Fully 68% (CAD$ 959 million) of the announced public funding was channelled to investment in private sector firms. Canadian public funding showed a consistent focus on early and late stage development of COVID-19 MCMs and the expansion of biopharmaceutical manufacturing capacity. Assessing whether Canada's investments into developing COVID-19 MCMs safeguard affordable and transparent access to the products of publicly funded research, we found that access policies on IP management, sharing of clinical data, affordability and availability were not systematic, consistent, or transparent, and few, if any, mechanisms ensured long-term sustainability. CONCLUSION: Beyond incremental change in policy goals, such as public investment in domestic biomanufacturing, the features of Canadian public policies endorsing financialization in the biopharmaceutical sector remained largely unchanged during the pandemic.

Exploring parents' views of the use of narratives to promote childhood vaccination online.

BACKGROUND: Negative information about vaccines that spreads online may contribute to parents' vaccine hesitancy or refusal. Studies have shown that false claims about vaccines that use emotive personal narratives are more likely to be shared and engaged with on social media than factual evidence-based public health messages. The aim of this study was to explore parents' views regarding the use of positive narratives to promote childhood vaccination. METHODS: We identified three ∼4-minute video narratives from social media that counter frequent parental concerns about childhood vaccination: parents and informed decision-making (online misinformation about vaccines); a paediatrician's clinical experience with vaccine-preventable diseases (prevention of still existing diseases); and a mother's experience with vaccine-preventable disease (risks of the disease). Focus group discussions were held with parents of children aged 0 to 5 years to assess their views on these three narratives and their general opinion on the use of narratives as a vaccine promotion intervention. RESULTS: Four focus groups discussions were virtually held with 15 parents in December 2021. In general, parents trusted both health care provider's and parent's narratives, but participants identified more with stories having a parent as the main character. Both narratives featuring personal stories with vaccine-preventable diseases were preferred by parents, while the story about informed decision-making was perceived as less influential. Parents expressed the need for reliable and nuanced information about vaccines and diseases and felt that a short video format featuring a story was an efficient vaccine promotion intervention. However, many mentioned that they generally are not watching such videos while navigating the Web. CONCLUSION: While vaccine-critical stories are widely shared online, evidence on how best public health could counter these messages remains scarce. The use of narratives to promote vaccination was well-perceived by parents. Future studies are needed to assess reach and impact of such an intervention.

From high hopes to disenchantment: A qualitative analysis of editorial cartoons on COVID-19 vaccines in Canadian newspapers.

In Canada, the first COVID-19 vaccine was approved for use in December 2020, marking the beginning of a large vaccination campaign. The campaign was not only unprecedented in terms of reach, but also with regards to the amount of information about vaccines that circulated in traditional and social media. This study's aim was to describe COVID-19 vaccine related discourses in Canada through an analysis of editorial cartoons. We collected 2172 cartoons about COVID-19 published between January 2020 and August 2022 in Canadian newspapers. These cartoons were downloaded and a first thematic analysis was conducted using the WHO-EPIWIN taxonomy (cause, illness, treatment, interventions, and information). From this, 389 cartoons related to COVID-19 vaccines were identified under the treatment category. These were subjected to a second thematic analysis to assess main themes (e.g., vaccine development, campaign progress, etc.), characters featured (e.g., politicians, public figures, public) and position with respect to vaccine (favorable, unfavorable, neutral). Six main themes emerged: Research and development of vaccines; Management of the vaccination campaign; Perceptions of and experiences with vaccination services; Measures and incentives to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake; Criticism of the unvaccinated; and Effectiveness of vaccination. Our analysis revealed a shift in attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination from high hopes to disenchantment, which may reflect some vaccine fatigue. In the future, public health authorities could face some challenges in maintaining confidence and high COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

"I Want People to Be Able to Make an Informed Choice": How Quebec naturopaths discuss vaccination in their practice.

Health care providers' recommendations can play an important role in individuals' vaccination decisions. Despite being one of the most popular complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), naturopathy is understudied in relation to vaccination decisions. We sought to address this gap through this study of vaccination perspectives of naturopathy practitioners in the province of Quebec, Canada. We conducted in-depth interviews with 30 naturopaths. Thematic analysis was conducted. Main themes were developed deductively (i.e., based on prior literature) and expanded through inductive coding of the data. Participants noted that they discuss vaccination in their practice, but only when clients asked questions or wanted advice. Naturopaths described refraining from explicitly recommending for or against vaccination. Instead, they focus on empowering their clients to make their own informed decision regarding vaccination. Most participants noted that they direct clients towards sources of information so that clients could decide for themselves, but some mentioned they discussed with clients what they considered to be risks associated with vaccination, as well as its benefits. These discussions were framed through a personalized and individual approach with clients.

"Ultimately, the choice is theirs": Informed choice vaccine conversations and Canadian midwives.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, vaccination that protects against pertussis and influenza is recommended in every pregnancy, but uptake remains low. Communicating the risks and benefits of vaccination is key to clinical conversations about vaccination, which may influence the uptake of pregnancy and subsequent infant vaccines. Canadian midwives use an informed choice model of care, which is distinct from informed consent and prioritizes client autonomy in decision-making. METHODS: Using institutional ethnography, which treats lived experience as expertise, we aimed to understand how Canadian midwives, governed by intersecting professional standards and regulations, navigate vaccine discussions with their clients. We conducted interviews with individuals involved in midwifery training, regulation, and continuing education, as well as key public health professionals with expertise in immunization training. Following the phases of thematic analysis outlined by Braun and Clarke, data were analyzed holistically, emergent themes identified, and coding categories developed. RESULTS: Two types of confidence emerged as important to midwives' ability to conduct a thoroughly informed choice discussion about vaccines: confidence in vaccination itself (vaccine confidence), and confidence in vaccine knowledge and counseling skills (vaccine counseling confidence). A deferred or shortened vaccine discussion could be the result of either vaccine hesitancy or counseling hesitancy. DISCUSSION: Currently, available clinical communication tools and recommended techniques for addressing vaccine hesitancy do not always adapt well to the needs of midwives working to support clients' informed choice decisions. Our findings suggest that Canadian midwives require more and clearer resources on both the risks and benefits of vaccination in pregnancy.

An equitable vaccine delivery system: Lessons from the COVID-19 vaccine rollout in Canada.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated existing health disparities and disproportionately affected vulnerable individuals and communities (e.g., low-income, precariously housed or in institutional settings, racialized, migrant, refugee, 2SLBGTQ+). Despite their higher risk of infection and sub-optimal access to healthcare, Canada's COVID-19 vaccination strategy focused primarily on age, as well as medical and occupational risk factors. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods constant comparative qualitative analysis of epidemiological data from a national database of COVID-19 cases and vaccine coverage in four Canadian jurisdictions. Jurisdictional policies, policy updates, and associated press releases were collected from government websites, and qualitative data were collected through 34 semi-structured interviews of key informants from nine Canadian jurisdictions. Interviews were coded and analyzed for themes and patterns. RESULTS: COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out in Canada in three phases, each accompanied by specific challenges. Vaccine delivery systems typically featured large-venue mass immunization sites that presented a variety of barriers for those from vulnerable communities. The engagement and targeted outreach that featured in the later phases were driven predominantly by the efforts of community organizations and primary care providers, with limited support from provincial governments. CONCLUSIONS: While COVID-19 vaccine rollout in Canada is largely considered a success, such an interpretation is shaped by the metrics chosen. Vaccine delivery systems across Canada need substantial improvements to ensure optimal uptake and equitable access for all. Our findings suggest a more equitable model for vaccine delivery featuring early establishment of local barrier-free clinics, culturally safe and representative environment, as well as multi-lingual assistance, among other vulnerability-sensitive elements.

Unmasking the Twitter Discourses on Masks During the COVID-19 Pandemic: User Cluster-Based BERT Topic Modeling Approach.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has spotlighted the politicization of public health issues. A public health monitoring tool must be equipped to reveal a public health measure's political context and guide better interventions. In its current form, infoveillance tends to neglect identity and interest-based users, hence being limited in exposing how public health discourse varies by different political groups. Adopting an algorithmic tool to classify users and their short social media texts might remedy that limitation. Objective: We aimed to implement a new computational framework to investigate discourses and temporal changes in topics unique to different user clusters. The framework was developed to contextualize how web-based public health discourse varies by identity and interest-based user clusters. We used masks and mask wearing during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in the English-speaking world as a case study to illustrate the application of the framework. Methods: We first clustered Twitter users based on their identities and interests as expressed through Twitter bio pages. Exploratory text network analysis reveals salient political, social, and professional identities of various user clusters. It then uses BERT Topic modeling to identify topics by the user clusters. It reveals how web-based discourse has shifted over time and varied by 4 user clusters: conservative, progressive, general public, and public health professionals. Results: This study demonstrated the importance of a priori user classification and longitudinal topical trends in understanding the political context of web-based public health discourse. The framework reveals that the political groups and the general public focused on the science of mask wearing and the partisan politics of mask policies. A populist discourse that pits citizens against elites and institutions was identified in some tweets. Politicians (such as Donald Trump) and geopolitical tensions with China were found to drive the discourse. It also shows limited participation of public health professionals compared with other users. Conclusions: We conclude by discussing the importance of a priori user classification in analyzing web-based discourse and illustrating the fit of BERT Topic modeling in identifying contextualized topics in short social media texts.

Public health communication in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Communication is central to the implementation and effectiveness of public health measures. Informed by theories of good governance, COVID-19 pandemic public health messaging in 3 Canadian provinces is assessed for its potential to encourage or undermine public trust and adherence. METHODS: This study employed a mixed-methods constant comparative approach to triangulate epidemiological COVID-19 data and qualitative data from news releases, press briefings, and key informant interviews. Communications were analyzed from January 2020 to October 2021 in Nova Scotia, Ontario, and Alberta. Interview data came from 34 semi-structured key informant interviews with public health actors across Canada. Team-based coding and thematic analysis were conducted to analyze communications and interview transcripts. RESULTS: Four main themes emerged as integral to good communication: transparency, promptness, clarity, and engagement of diverse communities. Our data indicate that a lack of transparency surrounding evidence and public health decision-making, delays in public health communications, unclear and inconsistent terminology and activities within and across jurisdictions, and communications that did not consider or engage diverse communities' perspectives may have decreased the effectiveness of public health communications and adherence to public health measures throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that increased federal guidance with wider jurisdictional collaboration backed by transparent evidence could improve the effectiveness of communication practices by instilling public trust and adherence with public health measures. Effective communication should be transparent, supported by reliable evidence, prompt, clear, consistent, and sensitive to diverse values. Improved communication training, established engagement infrastructure, and increased collaborations and diversity of decision-makers and communicators are recommended.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: La communication est centrale à l'implantation et au succès des mesures de santé publique. À partir des théories de bonne gouvernance, les messages de santé publique sur la COVID-19 de trois provinces canadiennes ont été analysés afin d'évaluer si ces messages renforçaient ou diminuaient la confiance et l'adhésion de la population. MéTHODES: Cette étude utilise une approche comparative constante et des méthodes mixtes pour trianguler des données épidémiologiques sur la COVID-19 avec des données qualitatives provenant de communiqués de presse, de conférences de presse et d'entretiens avec des informateurs clés. Les communications ont été analysées entre janvier 2020 et octobre 2021 en Nouvelle-Écosse, Ontario et Alberta. Les données proviennent également de 34 entretiens semi-dirigés avec des acteurs de santé publique à travers le Canada. Une codification en équipe et une analyse de contenu thématique ont été réalisées pour analyser les communications et les verbatim des entretiens. RéSULTATS: Quatre thèmes principaux sont apparus comme faisant partie intégrante d'une bonne communication : la transparence, la rapidité, la clarté et l'engagement des diverses communautés. Nos données indiquent qu'un manque de transparence en ce qui a trait aux données probantes et aux processus de prise de décision en santé publique, que les retards dans les stratégies de communication de santé publique, qu'une terminologie et des activités incohérentes et inconsistantes dans les provinces et entre elles, ainsi que des communications qui ne tenaient pas compte des points de vue ou qui n'incluaient pas les diverses communautés, ont pu réduire l'efficacité des communications et l'adhésion aux mesures de santé publique tout au long de la pandémie de COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Cette étude suggère que des lignes directrices nationales et une collaboration accrue entre les provinces et les territoires soutenues par des données probantes transparentes pourraient améliorer l'efficacité des communications en suscitant la confiance du public et l'adhésion aux mesures de santé publique. Une communication efficace doit être transparente, appuyée sur des données probantes fiables, rapide, claire, cohérente et sensible aux différentes valeurs. Il est recommandé d'améliorer la formation en communication, d'établir une infrastructure pour accroître l'engagement, et de soutenir la collaboration et la diversité des décideurs et des communicateurs.

A qualitative investigation of facilitators and barriers to accessing COVID-19 vaccines among Racialized and Indigenous Peoples in Canada.

Structural and systemic inequalities can contribute to susceptibility to COVID-19 disease and limited access to vaccines. Recognizing that Racialized and Indigenous Peoples may experience unique barriers to COVID-19 vaccination, this study explored early COVID-19 vaccine accessibility, including barriers and potential solutions to vaccine access, for these communities in Canada. We conducted semi-structured interviews about challenges to accessing COVID-19 vaccination with Racialized and Indigenous Peoples, including linguistic minorities and newcomers, in Spring 2021, just as COVID-19 vaccines were becoming more widely available in Canada. Participants were purposely selected from respondents to a Canadian national online survey. Three researchers analyzed the interviews for emergent themes using a descriptive content analysis approach in NVivo. At the time of the interview, interview participants (N = 27) intended to receive (n = 15) or had received (n = 11) at least one vaccine dose, or did not state their status (n = 1). Participants described multiple barriers to COVID-19 vaccination that they personally experienced and/or anticipated they or others could experience - including technology requirements, language barriers, lack of identification documentation, and travel challenges - as well as related solutions. These were organized into three broad categories: 1) COVID-19 disease and vaccination information, 2) vaccination booking procedures, and 3) vaccination sites. These structural and systemic barriers during the initial months of vaccine rollout substantially restricted participants' COVID-19 vaccination access, even when they were eager to get vaccinated, and should be addressed early in vaccine rollouts to facilitate optimal uptake for everyone everywhere.

Understanding the Influence of Web-Based Information, Misinformation, Disinformation, and Reinformation on COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance: Protocol for a Multicomponent Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has generated an explosion in the amount of information shared on the internet, including false and misleading information on SARS-CoV-2 and recommended protective behaviors. Prior to the pandemic, web-based misinformation and disinformation were already identified as having an impact on people's decision to refuse or delay recommended vaccination for themselves or their children. OBJECTIVE: The overall aims of our study are to better understand the influence of web-based misinformation and disinformation on COVID-19 vaccine decisions and investigate potential solutions to reduce the impact of web-based misinformation and disinformation about vaccines. METHODS: Based on different research approaches, the study will involve (1) the use of artificial intelligence techniques, (2) a web-based survey, (3) interviews, and (4) a scoping review and an environmental scan of the literature. RESULTS: As of September 1, 2022, data collection has been completed for all objectives. The analysis is being conducted, and results should be disseminated in the upcoming months. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study will help with understanding the underlying determinants of vaccine hesitancy among Canadian individuals and identifying effective, tailored interventions to improve vaccine acceptance among them. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41012.

Suitable but requiring support: How the midwifery model of care offers opportunities to counsel the vaccine hesitant pregnant population.

Uptake of vaccination during pregnancy in Canada is lower than comparator countries. A recommendation from a trusted perinatal healthcare provider is a key opportunity to promote vaccine uptake and improve confidence. This study aims to identify barriers and opportunities to vaccination in midwifery care. Seventeen semi-structured telephone interviews with practicing midwives, educators and public health professionals with immunization training experiences were conducted. Documents pertaining to the midwifery profession (approx. 50) were reviewed. Inductive thematic analysis identified logistical, interprofessional, and information barriers preventing Canadian midwives from administering vaccines and counseling clients about vaccination, as well as opportunities to address each barrier. Key interventions at the level of logistics, training, and client information materials would help address barriers to the integration of midwives into the provision and recommendation of vaccines in perinatal care across Canada.

Nova Scotia Strong: why communities joined to embrace COVID-19 public health measures.

OBJECTIVE: To explore Nova Scotian experiences, barriers, and facilitators associated with pandemic public health measures (PHM), including COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured, individual interviews with Nova Scotians between May and August 2021, during the third wave of COVID-19 cases and provincial lockdown. Participants were recruited across the province from three sectors: decision makers, community leaders, and community members using purposive and snowball sampling. Direct content analysis and thematic analysis were used to identify key themes via the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: The experiences of 30 Nova Scotian interviewees clustered around four themes: Communication of PHM, Responsibly Observing PHM: A Community Coming Together, Navigating PHM, and Vaccine Confidence & Hesitancy. Consistent communication of PHM through briefings with the chief medical officer of health and provincial channels reduced misinformation and encouraged PHM compliance. While adherence was high throughout the province, inconsistent enforcement of these measures proved challenging to individuals navigating PHMs. A high level of COVID-19 vaccine confidence and acceptance was identified, and a strong sense of provincial pride prevailed in keeping COVID-19 numbers and transmission low. CONCLUSION: This study provides insights into Nova Scotians' unique experiences with COVID-19 PHM. Provincial public health experts and government leaders communicated PHM with various levels of success, Nova Scotia Strong, a sentiment of unity and communitarianism that sprang from public response to tragic events. Future work should aim to include under-represented communities to facilitate broader inclusion.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Explorer les expériences des Néo-Écossais et les éléments qui entravent ou qui favorisent les mesures sanitaires pandémiques (MSP), dont la vaccination contre la COVID-19, en Nouvelle-Écosse. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené des entretiens individuels semi-directifs avec des Néo-Écossais entre mai et août 2021, au cours de la troisième vague de cas de COVID-19 et de confinement dans la province. Des participants de trois groupes (décideurs, responsables locaux et résidents) ont été recrutés dans toute la province à l'aide de sondages intentionnels et cumulatifs. Nous avons utilisé l'analyse directe de contenu et l'analyse thématique pour cerner les principaux thèmes à l'aide du cadre des domaines théoriques (cadre TDF). RéSULTATS: Les expériences des 30 Néo-Écossais interrogés s'articulaient autour de quatre thèmes : Communication des MSP, Observance responsable des MSP : une communauté qui se rassemble, S'y retrouver dans le dédale des MSP et Confiance envers les vaccins et hésitation vaccinale. La communication cohérente des MSP lors des breffages du médecin-hygiéniste en chef et par les canaux provinciaux a réduit la mésinformation et encouragé l'observance des MSP. Cette observance était élevée à l'échelle de la province, mais l'application incohérente des mesures a rendu difficile pour les gens de s'y retrouver dans le dédale des MSP. Un niveau élevé de confiance et d'acceptation des vaccins contre la COVID-19 a été observé, et un profond sentiment de fierté provinciale a pris le dessus pour réduire le nombre de cas et la transmission de la COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Cette étude vient éclairer les expériences uniques des Néo-Écossais face aux MSP liées à la COVID-19. Les spécialistes provinciaux de la santé publique et les chefs du gouvernement ont communiqué les MSP de façon coordonnée et ont bénéficié du sentiment d'unité et de l'esprit communautaire (Nova Scotia Strong) qui ont émergé dans la population à la suite d'autres tragédies. Les démarches futures devraient chercher à inclure les communautés sous-représentées.

Deferring Risk: Limitations to the Evidence in Product Labels for Vaccine Use in Pregnancy.

Background: The gaps in clinical trial evidence about vaccination in pregnancy have serious implications for health care worker and public misunderstandings. Contradictions between National Immunization Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) recommendations and regulatory product labeling information contribute to misinformation about vaccine safety and effectiveness. Methods: A mixed methods approach that included a stakeholder consensus decision-making workshop and a national survey of Canadian health care providers (HCPs). Results: We identified knowledge gaps and serious limitations concerning the information in vaccine product labels. Stakeholders were troubled that some HCPs rely on regulatory product labels to inform their decisions without knowing their limitations in content. Our survey showed that HCPs were uncertain about the purpose of product labels and the evidence contained in them. Over a third of respondents incorrectly thought that product labels and NITAG recommendations are based on the same evidence and that the information they contain is regularly updated. Conclusions: Applying social risk theories, we show how such gaps in information defer responsibility for decisions about disease risk and vaccine safety from regulatory agencies and vaccine manufacturers onto HCPs and their clients. This may be especially relevant for COVID-19 and other emerging vaccines that are initially authorized for conditional or emergency use, and especially in understudied populations such as pregnant people. More frequent updating and alignment of robust, unbiased, and independently reviewed clinical trial and postmarket safety and effectiveness evidence with NITAG recommendations would allay HCP and public misunderstandings.

"I don't think there's a point for me to discuss it with my patients": exploring health care providers' views and behaviours regarding COVID-19 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Health care providers' knowledge and attitudes about vaccines are important determinants of their own vaccine uptake, their intention to recommend vaccines, and their patients' vaccine uptake. This qualitative study' objective was to better understand health care providers' vaccination decisions, their views on barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and proposed solutions, their opinions on vaccine policies, and their perceived role in discussing COVID-19 vaccination with patients. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews on perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines were conducted with Canadian health care providers (N = 14) in spring 2021. A qualitative thematic analysis using NVivo was conducted. RESULTS: Participants had positive attitudes toward vaccination and were vaccinated against COVID-19 or intended to do so once eligible (two delayed their first dose). Only two were actively promoting COVID-19 vaccination to their patients; others either avoided discussing the topic or only provided answers when asked questions. Participants' proposed solutions to enhance COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the public were in relation to access to vaccination services, information in multiple languages, and community outreach. Most participants were in favor of mandatory vaccination policies and had mixed views on the potential impact of the Canadian vaccine-injury support program. CONCLUSIONS: While health care providers are recognized as a key source of information regarding vaccines, participants in our study did not consider it their role to provide advice on COVID-19 vaccination. This is a missed opportunity that could be avoided by ensuring health care providers have the tools and training to feel confident in engaging in vaccine discussions with their patients.

The unintended consequences of COVID-19 vaccine policy: why mandates, passports and restrictions may cause more harm than good.

Vaccination policies have shifted dramatically during COVID-19 with the rapid emergence of population-wide vaccine mandates, domestic vaccine passports and differential restrictions based on vaccination status. While these policies have prompted ethical, scientific, practical, legal and political debate, there has been limited evaluation of their potential unintended consequences. Here, we outline a comprehensive set of hypotheses for why these policies may ultimately be counterproductive and harmful. Our framework considers four domains: (1) behavioural psychology, (2) politics and law, (3) socioeconomics, and (4) the integrity of science and public health. While current vaccines appear to have had a significant impact on decreasing COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality burdens, we argue that current mandatory vaccine policies are scientifically questionable and are likely to cause more societal harm than good. Restricting people's access to work, education, public transport and social life based on COVID-19 vaccination status impinges on human rights, promotes stigma and social polarisation, and adversely affects health and well-being. Current policies may lead to a widening of health and economic inequalities, detrimental long-term impacts on trust in government and scientific institutions, and reduce the uptake of future public health measures, including COVID-19 vaccines as well as routine immunisations. Mandating vaccination is one of the most powerful interventions in public health and should be used sparingly and carefully to uphold ethical norms and trust in institutions. We argue that current COVID-19 vaccine policies should be re-evaluated in light of the negative consequences that we outline. Leveraging empowering strategies based on trust and public consultation, and improving healthcare services and infrastructure, represent a more sustainable approach to optimising COVID-19 vaccination programmes and, more broadly, the health and well-being of the public.

Stigma and blame related to COVID-19 pandemic: A case-study of editorial cartoons in Canada.

The COVID-19 pandemic represents not only the spread of a highly contagious and potentially fatal virus, but also an outbreak of theories, rumors, discourses and representations trying to make sense of a crisis. In this article, we explore the issue of blame and stigma in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada. We do so by studying editorial cartoons published about COVID-19 in ten mainstream Canadian newspapers between January 2020 and March 2021. We identified 203 editorial cartoons that highlight common discourses which blame or stigmatize specific groups of people for the origin or transmission of COVID-19, or for their behavior during the pandemic. The cartoons focused on four groups: 1) people of Chinese origin or descent and of other national/geographic provenance (Americans, Canadians from specific provinces, urban residents); 2) international travelers; 3) people who do not respect the preventive measures to contain the pandemic; and 4) people who question or criticize the scientific discourses about COVID-19. Our analysis revealed an "othering process" common in times of pandemic. Our analysis of editorial cartoons in Canada also uncovered a moralization around the respect of the counter measures against COVID-19. These editorial cartoons largely divide the population into two groups: 1) "virtuous" people who are "selfless" and "smart" and who respect the public health preventive measures; 2) those who are "immoral", "self-centered", "silly" and even "stupid", who do not respect the recommended measures to prevent the transmission of COVID-19. While negatively portraying these individuals may help promote adherence to the recommended measures, it also can exacerbate polarization. Analyzing editorial cartoons can be a useful approach to rapidly gather information on attitudes and feelings in the public at a specific time and place.

From sandbox to pandemic: Agile reform of Canadian drug regulation.

Public health urgency for emerging COVID-19 treatments and vaccines challenges regulators worldwide to ensure safety and efficacy while expediting approval. In Canada, legislative amendments by 2019 Omnibus Bill C-97 created a new "agile" licensing framework known as the "Advanced Therapeutic Pathway" (ATPathway) and modernized the regulation of clinical trials of drugs, vaccines, and medical devices. Bill C-97's amendments are worthy of attention in Canada and globally, as health product regulation bends to COVID-19. The amendments follow reforms elsewhere to accommodate health product innovation, however, the Canadian ATPathway is broader and more flexible than its counterparts in other jurisdictions. In addition, Bill C-97 informed Canada's COVID-19 response in important ways, particularly in relation to clinical trials. The measures adopted by the drug regulatory authority, Health Canada (HC) during COVID-19 may become the new norm in Canadian regulatory practice insofar as they help achieve the amendments introduced by Bill C-97. Finally, despite government rhetoric of transparency, the agenda-setting, formulation, and implementation of the amendments have occurred with little opportunity for scrutiny or public engagement.

Ethics check-up of public health immunization programs in Canada.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recognizes immunization as one of the most successful and effective public health interventions for saving lives. In developing a roadmap for prioritizing use of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in the context of limited supply, WHO highlighted the importance of a values (ethical principles) framework. Immunization does need to be subject to independent ethical scrutiny of vaccine research data, manufacturing practices, the legal and ethical assurance of informed consent, and also social justice issues with respect to program equity, including right to access. An ethics review of Australia's immunization program was reported in 2012. This CANVax (Canadian Vaccination Evidence Resource and Exchange Centre) Brief offers an ethics review of immunization in Canada using the criteria utilized for Australia.