Search

The psychosocial underpinnings of vaccine hesitancy are complex. Research is needed to pinpoint the exact reasons why people hesitate to vaccinate themselves or their children against vaccine-preventable diseases. One possible reason are concerns that arise from a misunderstanding of vaccine science. We examined the impact of scientific reasoning on vaccine hesitancy and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination intent through a cross-sectional study of parents of vaccine-eligible children (N = 399) at immunization clinics in Shanghai, China. We assessed the relationship between science reasoning and both vaccine hesitancy and HPV vaccine acceptance using general additive models. We found a significant association between scientific reasoning and education level, with those with less than a high school education having a significantly lower scientific reasoning that those with a college education (ß = -1.31, p-value = 0.002). However, there was little evidence of a relationship between scientific reasoning and vaccine hesitancy. Scientific reasoning therefore appears not to exert primary influence on the formation of vaccine attitudes among the respondents surveyed. We suggest that research on vaccine hesitancy continues working to identify the styles of reasoning parents engage in when determining whether or not to vaccinate their children. This research could inform the development and implementation of tailored vaccination campaigns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Human behavior and understanding of the vaccine ecosystem play a critical role in the vaccination decision-making process. The objective of this study was to understand different cognitive biases that may lead to vaccine acceptance or hesitancy. Methods: The eligibility criteria for this scoping review was vaccination-related cognitive bias studies published in the English language from inception to April 2022 and available on PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar. It included all geographical locations and individuals of all age groups and excluded studies focusing on (i) clinical trials of vaccines, (ii) vaccine research conduct bias, (iii) cognitive delay, or (iv) statistical biases. The search method also included reviewing references in the retrieved articles. Results: Overall, 58 articles were identified, and after screening, 19 were included in this study. Twenty-one cognitive biases with the potential to affect vaccination decision-making were observed. These biases were further grouped into three broad categories: cognitive biases seen while processing vaccine-related information, during vaccination-related decision-making, and due to prior beliefs regarding vaccination. Conclusions: This review identified critical cognitive biases affecting the entire process of vaccination that can influence research and public health efforts both positively and negatively. Recognizing and mitigating these cognitive biases is crucial for maintaining the population's level of trust in vaccination programs around the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• COVID-19 non-vaccination in parents correlates with more negative views on childhood vaccines over time. • There is spillover between beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccine and routine childhood vaccines. • More negative beliefs about childhood vaccines over time clustered in places with low COVID-19 vaccination rates. • Parental experiences with COVID-19 vaccination and disease are predictive of beliefs about childhood vaccines. It is unclear how hesitancy towards pediatric vaccines has changed quantitatively since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and if changes are more readily apparent in clusters of low COVID-19 vaccination. In this study, we assess how clusters of low COVID-19 vaccination correlate with changing parental beliefs about childhood vaccines. A cross-sectional, opt-in, internet-based survey of parents resident in the U.S. was conducted during August-September 2022. Our survey measured changes in beliefs about childhood vaccine safety, importance, and effectiveness since the start of COVID-19. We also measured parents' perceived vaccination rates in the community, assessing its relationship with changing vaccination perceptions using Rao-Scott chi-square tests, and multinomial logistic regression models. Among 310 parents of children 0–17 years old, 11 % (95 % CI: 7 %, 15 %) believed that childhood vaccines are less safe, 12 % (95 % CI: 8 %, 17 %) less important, and 13 % (95 % CI: 9 %, 18 %) less effective since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. About 9 % (95 % CI: 5 %, 12 %) stated COVID-19 vaccination coverage was low in their community. Among those who stated COVID-19 vaccination coverage was low, 38 % reported believing childhood vaccines were less effective (vs 12 % of those who stated vaccination coverage was high). This corresponds to 4.34 times greater odds of believing childhood vaccines were less effective since the start of the pandemic (95 % CI: 1.38, 13.73) in those who believe COVID-19 vaccination coverage to be low in their community vs high. Our study demonstrates that parental perceptions about childhood vaccines have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic through geographic and social clustering of non-vaccination. Beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccine have spillover with beliefs about childhood vaccines, and more negative beliefs may be clustering in areas with low vaccination coverage, which could predispose the area to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The development of vaccines has been a significant factor in eliminating the pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). However, the primary series vaccination rate still falls short of our expectations, with an even lower rate of uptake for booster shots. This study examined demographic patterns of COVID-19 vaccination compliance by assessing patterns in the timing of the vaccine series start and vaccination completion and characterizing people by compliance with vaccination recommendations. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted online in August 2022. Participants answered questions about the COVID-19 vaccine and questions related to their personal backgrounds. We assessed the impact of demographic factors on COVID-19 vaccination using multivariable regression modeling. Results: Among 700 eligible participants, 61% (389) were highly adherent (i.e., started by late 2020 and received a booster dose), 22% (184) were moderately adherent (i.e., started later than June 2021, and/or did not receive the booster dose), and 17% (127) were unvaccinated. Compliance was relatively low among non-Hispanic Black Americans, those with no religious affiliation, and among Independents and Republicans. Conclusion: Vaccination compliance varies across demographic groups. Race/ethnicity, religion, and political affiliation are highly associated with vaccination compliance. To promote vaccination compliance and decrease vaccine hesitancy, the government and healthcare institutions should establish a positive image to obtain public trust and adopt effective vaccine education and intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Achieving COVID-19 community protection (aka, herd immunity) in China may be challenging because many individuals remain unsure or are unwilling to be vaccinated. One potential means to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake is to essentially mandate vaccination by using existing mobile technologies that can prohibit unvaccinated individuals from certain public spaces. The "Health Code" is a ubiquitous mobile phone app in China that regulates freedom of travel based on individuals' predicted risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Green-colored codes indicate ability to travel unrestricted in low-risk regions; yellow-colored codes indicate prohibition from major public spaces and modes of public transportation. We examined the effects of a "Health Code"-based vaccine mandate on willingness to vaccinate for COVID-19 in China. In August 2020, an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted among adults living in China. Participants completed up to six DCE choice sets, each containing two hypothetical COVID-19 vaccination scenario choices and a "do not vaccinate" choice. Half of the choice sets had a "Health Code" attribute that associated the "do not vaccinate" choice with a yellow Health Code implying restricted travel. Weighted, mixed effects multinomial logit regression was used to estimate preference utilities and predicted choice probabilities. Overall, 873 participants completed 4317 choice sets. Most participants attained at least college-level education (90.9%). 29.8% of participants were identified as vaccine hesitators (defined as being unsure or unwilling to receive a COVID-19 vaccination). With and without the "Health Code"-based vaccine mandate, there was an 8.6% (85% CI: 6.4% − 10.92%) and 17.3% (85% CI:13.1% − 21.6%) respective predicted probability that vaccine hesitators would choose "do not vaccinate" over a common vaccination scenario currently in China (i.e., free, domestic vaccine, 80% effectiveness, 10% probability of fever side-effects, administered in a large hospital, two doses). Corresponding predicted probabilities for people who did not express vaccine hesitancy was 0.3% (93% CI: 0.0% − 14.3%) and 3.5% (93% CI:2.3% − 4.8%). The "Health Code"-based mandate significantly increased willingness to vaccinate when vaccine efficacy was greater than 60%. Among vaccine hesitators with higher educational attainment, willingness to vaccinate for COVID-19 appears to increase if mobile technology-based vaccine mandates prohibit unvaccinated individuals from public spaces and public transportation. However, such mandates may not increase willingness if perceived vaccine efficacy is low. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the rollout of COVID-19 vaccination, many states relaxed mask wearing guidance for those vaccinated. The aim of this study was to examine the association between vaccination status and mask wearing behaviors. Seven waves of surveys (n = 6721) were conducted between August 2020 and June 2021. Participants were asked about initiation of COVID-19 vaccination and mask wearing behavior at work/school or a grocery store. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from logistic regression were used to estimate associations between vaccination status and mask wearing at work/school and at the grocery store. Between April and June 2021, mask wearing at work or school declined among both those vaccinated (74% to 49%) and unvaccinated (46% to 35%). There was a similar decline for mask wearing at grocery stores. The odds of wearing a mask were 2.35 times higher at work/school (95% CI: 1.82, 3.04) and 1.65 times at a grocery store (95% CI: 1.29, 2.11) among the vaccinated compared to unvaccinated. Mask wearing decreased after mask guidelines were relaxed, with consistently lower mask wearing among the unvaccinated, indicating a reluctance among the unvaccinated to adopt COVID-19 risk reduction behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vaccine hesitancy—the delay or refusal of vaccines despite their availability—has been linked to lower vaccination rates and outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. Using cross-sectional surveys of 78,725 parents and other family members in the United States, Nguyen et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2022;191(9):1626-1635) calculated the population attributable fraction (PAF) of vaccine hesitancy on nonreceipt of recommended childhood vaccines, including influenza vaccine. The PAF is readily calculated: p (rr − 1)/ rr, where p is the proportion of those hesitant among nonvaccinated individuals, and rr is the risk ratio of nonvaccination between those hesitant over those nonhesitant. By vaccine, the PAF ranged from 6.5% for nonreceipt of the hepatitis B vaccine birth dose to 31.3% for nonreceipt of the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine dose 3. For nonreceipt of influenza vaccine, the PAF varied geographically, with relatively high values in some Northeast (e.g. New York at 22.6%) and Northwest (e.g. Oregon at 23.0%) states and lower values in certain Southern (e.g. Louisiana at 7.5%) and Mountain West (e.g. Utah at 8.8%) states. The PAF can elucidate the contribution of vaccine hesitancy on nonvaccination in different circumstances. Future studies can apply this technique in different populations and incorporate different measures of vaccine hesitancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is important to distinguish between apprehensions that lead to vaccine rejection and those that do not. In this study, we (1) identifed latent classes of individuals by vaccination attitudes, and (2) compared classes of individuals by sociodemographic characteristics COVID-19 vaccination, and risk reduction behaviors. The COVID-19 Coping Study is a longitudinal cohort of US adults aged ≥ 55 years (n = 2358). We categorized individuals into three classes based on the adult Vaccine Hesitancy Scale using latent class analysis (LCA). The associations between class membership and sociodemographic characteristics, COVID-19 vaccination, and other behaviors were assessed using chi-square tests. In total, 88.9% were Vaccine Acceptors, 8.6% were Vaccine Ambivalent, and 2.5% Vaccine Rejectors. At the end, 90.7% of Acceptors, 62.4% of the Ambivalent, and 30.7% of the Rejectors had been vaccinated. The Ambivalent were more likely to be Black or Hispanic, and adopted social distancing and mask wearing behaviors intermediate to that of the Acceptors and Rejectors. Targeting the Vaccine Ambivalent may be an efficient way of increasing vaccination coverage. Controlling the spread of disease during a pandemic requires tailoring vaccine messaging to their concerns, e.g., through working with trusted community leaders, while promoting other risk reduction behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite their disparate rates of infection and mortality, many communities of color report high levels of vaccine hesitancy. This paper describes racial differences in COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Detroit, and assesses, using a mediation model, how individuals' personal experiences with COVID-19 and trust in authorities mediate racial disparities in vaccination acceptance. The Detroit Metro Area Communities Study (DMACS) is a panel survey of a representative sample of Detroit residents. There were 1012 respondents in the October 2020 wave, of which 856 (83%) were followed up in June 2021. We model the impact of race and ethnicity on vaccination uptake using multivariable logistic regression, and report mediation through direct experiences with COVID as well as trust in government and in healthcare providers. Within Detroit, only 58% of Non-Hispanic (NH) Black residents were vaccinated, compared to 82% of Non-Hispanic white Detroiters, 50% of Hispanic Detroiters, and 52% of other racial/ethnic groups. Trust in healthcare providers and experiences with friends and family dying from COVID-19 varied significantly by race/ethnicity. The mediation analysis reveals that 23% of the differences in vaccine uptake by race could be eliminated if NH Black Detroiters were to have levels of trust in healthcare providers similar to those among NH white Detroiters. Our analyses suggest that efforts to improve relationships among healthcare providers and NH Black communities in Detroit are critical to overcoming local COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Increased study of and intervention in these communities is critical to building trust and managing widespread health crises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]