Search

Objectives: Effective health communication can increase intent to vaccinate. We compared 8 messages that may influence parents’ intent to vaccinate their children against COVID-19.Methods: In a cross-sectional survey of adults in the United States administered online in August 2021, 1837 parents and legal guardians were exposed to 8 messages (individual choice, gain/practical benefits, nonexpert, health care provider recommendation, altruism/community good, safety/effectiveness, safety, and effectiveness) to determine message reception and influence on intent to vaccinate their children. Parents responded to 10 questions using a Likert scale. We computed odds ratios (ORs) for each message, with an OR >1.0 indicating greater observed odds of participant agreement with the follow-up statement as compared with a reference message. We compared outcomes individually across messages with ordinal logistic regression fit using generalized estimating equations.Results: The individual choice message had the highest odds of agreement for understanding intent (OR = 2.10; 95% CI, 1.94-2.27), followed by the health care provider recommendation message (OR = 1.58; 95% CI, 1.46-1.71). The individual choice message had the highest odds of memorability, relatability, and trustworthiness. The altruism/community good message was at or near second best. The altruism/community good message had the highest or near-highest odds of increasing parents’ intent to vaccinate their children, asking friends and family for their thoughts, and searching for additional information. The message that most motivated parents to vaccinate their children depended on parental intent to vaccinate prior to being exposed to the tested messages.Conclusions: Messages with themes of individual choice, health care provider recommendation, and altruism/community good may be used in future message campaigns. Further research is needed to refine message concepts related to altruism/community good.

Objective: Public health agencies have a critical role in providing effective messaging about mitigation strategies during a public health emergency. The objectives of this study were (1) to understand perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines, including concerns about side effects, safety, and effectiveness and how these perceptions influence vaccine decision-making among US adults and (2) to learn what messages might motivate vaccine uptake.Methods: In April and May 2021, we conducted 14 online focus groups with non-Hispanic English-speaking and English- and Spanish-speaking Hispanic adults (N = 99) not vaccinated against COVID-19. We oversampled adults aged 18-39 years and rural residents and systematically assessed 10 test messages. Researchers used a standardized guide and an a priori codebook for focus group discussions, coding transcripts, and thematic analysis.Results: Vaccine hesitancy factors included fear of the unknown; long-term side effects, including infertility; and beliefs that the vaccines were developed too quickly and were not sufficiently effective. Motivating factors for receiving vaccination included the ability to safely socialize and travel. Health care providers were considered important trusted messengers. Participants were critical of most messages tested. Messages that came across as “honest” about what is not yet known about COVID-19 vaccines were perceived more positively than other messages tested. Messages were seen as ineffective if perceived as vague or lacking in data and specificity.Conclusions: Messages that were simple and transparent about what is unknown about vaccines relative to emerging science were viewed most favorably. Health care providers, friends, and family were considered influential in vaccination decision-making. Findings underscore the benefits of research-informed strategies for developing and disseminating effective messages addressing critical issues in a public health emergency.

ABSTRACTCustomer complaints data are usually expressed as counts for a period of time and are governed by a Poisson process. This process is stationary when the number of complaints is constant, while a change in these numbers would indicate a potential change in the product performance. In this paper we describe an approach for establishing the maximum tolerance level for the number of complaints received within a month. Tolerance level is based on a relatively stable period of time when the Poisson process is stationary. A change-point analysis is performed to the complaints data that exhibit large changes to partition the relatively stable period from the problematic period. Examples that illustrate this approach are provided.