Search

The aim to this study was to assess preferences for sharing of electronic health record (EHR) and genetic information separately and to examine whether there are different preferences for sharing these 2 types of information. Using a population-based, nationally representative survey of the United States, we conducted a discrete choice experiment in which half of the subjects (N = 790) responded to questions about sharing of genetic information and the other half (N = 751) to questions about sharing of EHR information. Conditional logistic regression models assessed relative preferences across attribute levels of where patients learn about health information sharing, whether shared data are deidentified, whether data are commercialized, how long biospecimens are kept, and what the purpose of sharing the information is. Individuals had strong preferences to share deidentified (vs identified) data (odds ratio [OR] 3.26, 95% confidence interval 2.68-3.96) and to be able to opt out of sharing information with commercial companies (OR 4.26, 95% confidence interval 3.42-5.30). There were no significant differences regarding how long biospecimens are kept or why the data are being shared. Individuals had a stronger preference for opting out of sharing genetic (OR 4.26) versus EHR information (OR 2.64) (P =.002). Hospital systems and regulatory bodies should consider patient preferences for sharing of personal medical records or genetic information. For both genetic and EHR information, patients strongly prefer their data to be deidentified and to have the choice to opt out of sharing information with commercial companies. • There has been a rapid increase in the use of electronic health records, but regulatory bodies and hospital systems do not consider patient preferences in how these data can be shared. • In a survey of US adults, there was a strong preference to allow hospitals to share electronic health record data and genetic data only after deidentification and to let patients opt out of sharing information with commercial companies. • In terms of communicating to patients how their information is shared, the use of a patient portal may be more effective and preferred to other modes of communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study assessed preferences for hypothetical vaccines for children in 2 large vaccine markets according to how the vaccine-preventable disease is transmitted via a discrete choice experiment. Surveys in China (N = 1350) and the United States (N = 1413) were conducted from April to May 2021. The discrete choice experiment included attributes of cost, age at vaccination, transmission mode of the vaccine-preventable disease, and whether the vaccine prevents cancer. Preference utilities were modeled in a Bayesian, multinomial logistic regression model, and respondents were grouped by vaccine preference classification through a latent class analysis. Individuals favored vaccines against diseases with transmission modes other than sexual transmission (vaccine for sexually transmitted infection [STI] vs airborne disease, in the United States, odds ratio 0.71; 95% credible interval 0.64-0.78; in China, odds ratio 0.76; 95% credible interval 0.69-0.84). The latent class analysis revealed 6 classes: vaccine rejecters (19% in the United States and 8% in China), careful deciders (18% and 17%), preferring cancer vaccination (20% and 19%), preferring vaccinating children at older ages (10% and 11%), preferring vaccinating older ages, but indifferent about cancer vaccines (23% and 25%), and preferring vaccinating children at younger ages (10% and 19%). Vaccine rejection was higher with age in the United States versus more vaccine rejection among those at the age of 18 to 24 and ≥ 64 years in China. The public had strong preferences against giving their child an STI vaccine, and the class preferring a cancer vaccine was less accepting of an STI vaccine. Overall, this study points to the need for more education about how some STI vaccines could also prevent cancers. • Countries have had mixed success rolling out vaccines for sexually transmitted infections (STIs). For example, human papillomavirus vaccination lags behind hepatitis B vaccination. • Individuals in the United States and in China had consistently strong dispreferences for STI vaccines, although the 2 countries varied in terms of what proportion and what groups would reject vaccines altogether. • Rollout of future STI vaccines should also consider preferences for when the vaccine be administered and what chronic diseases the vaccine prevents. [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]

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]

The arrival of the COVID-19 vaccine has been accompanied by increased discussion of vaccine hesitancy. However, it is unclear if there are shared patterns between general vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 vaccine rejection, or if these are two different concepts. This study characterized rejection of a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine, and compared patterns of association between general vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 vaccine rejection. The survey was conducted online March 20-22, 2020. Participants answered questions on vaccine hesitancy and responded if they would accept the vaccine given different safety and effectiveness profiles. We assessed differences in COVID-19 rejection and general vaccine hesitancy through logistic regressions. Among 713 participants, 33.0% were vaccine hesitant, and 18.4% would reject a COVID-19 vaccine. Acceptance varied by effectiveness profile: 10.2% would reject a 95% effective COVID-19 vaccine, but 32.4% would reject a 50% effective vaccine. Those vaccine hesitant were significantly more likely to reject COVID-19 vaccination [odds ratio (OR): 5.56, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.39, 9.11]. In multivariable logistic regression models, there were similar patterns for vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 vaccine rejection by gender, race/ethnicity, family income, and political affiliation. But the direction of association flipped by urbanicity (P=0.0146, with rural dwellers less likely to be COVID-19 vaccine rejecters but more likely to be vaccine hesitant in general), and age (P=0.0037, with fewer pronounced differences across age for COVID-19 vaccine rejection, but a gradient of stronger vaccine hesitancy in general among younger ages). During the COVID-19 epidemic's early phase, patterns of vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 vaccine rejection were relatively similar. A significant minority would reject a COVID-19 vaccine, especially one with less-than-ideal effectiveness. Preparations for introducing the COVID-19 vaccine should anticipate substantial hesitation and target concerns, especially among younger adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2, much of the US was placed under social distancing guidelines during March 2020. We characterized risk perceptions and adherence to social distancing recommendations in March 2020 among US adults aged 18+ in an online survey with age and gender quotas to match the general US population (N = 713). We used multivariable logistic and linear regression to estimate associations between age (by generational cohort) and these outcomes. The median perceived risk of infection with COVID-19 within the next month was 32%, and 65% of individuals were practicing more social distancing than before the outbreak. Baby Boomers had lower perceived risk than Millennials (-10.6%, 95% CI: -16.2%, -5.0%), yet were more frequently social distancing (OR = 1.64; 95% CI: 1.05, 2.56). Public health outreach should focus on raising compliance with social distancing recommendations, especially among high risk groups. Efforts to address risk perceptions alone may be inadequate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Due to its potential to lead to vaccine delays and refusals, vaccine hesitancy has attracted increased attention throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. It is crucial to investigate whether demographic patterns differ between adult general vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 and flu vaccine non-receipt., Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted online in August 2022. In response to questions about vaccine hesitancy, participants indicated whether they would receive the vaccine given various safety and efficacy profiles. Through logistic regression models, we examined variations between general vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 non-vaccination., Results: Among the 700 participants, 49% of the respondents were classified as having general vaccine hesitancy, 17% had not received the COVID-19 vaccine, and 36% had not had flu vaccinations. In the multivariable analysis, general vaccine hesitancy and the non-receipt of COVID-19 vaccines were significantly higher in Non-Hispanic Black participants, those with no religious affiliation, and Republicans and Independents., Conclusions: Patterns of vaccine hesitancy and the non-receipt of the COVID-19 vaccination did not vary, indicating a substantial overlap and potential spillover in vaccine hesitancy over the course of the pandemic. Because changing people's opinions regarding vaccinations is generally a challenge, different interventions specific to demographic subgroups may be necessary.

Objectives: This study assessed changes in behaviors/attitudes related to the COVID-19. With the understanding that behaviors and vaccine decision-making could contribute to global spread of infectious diseases, this study collected several waves of internet-based surveys from individuals in the United States, mainland China, Taiwan, Malaysia, Indonesia, and India. The aims of this study were to (1) characterize the relationship between the epidemiology of disease and changes over time in risk perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes towards hygienic behaviors; (2) examine if risk perceptions affect acceptance of less-than-ideal vaccines; and (3) contrast adherence to public health recommendations across countries which have had different governmental responses to the outbreak., Data Description: We conducted cross-sectional online surveys in six countries from March 2020 to April 2021. By the end of June 2021, there will be six waves of surveys for the United States and China, and four waves for the rest of countries. There are common sets of questions for all countries, however, some questions were adapted to reflect local situations and some questions were designed intentionally for specific countries to capture different COVID-19 mitigation actions. Participants were asked about their adherence towards countermeasures, risk perceptions, and acceptance of a hypothetical vaccine for COVID-19., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Most research on vaccine hesitancy has focused on parental attitudes toward childhood vaccination, but it will be important to understand dimensions of vaccine hesitancy in the adult population as more adult vaccines are introduced in the future. We modified the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale to target adult vaccines and provide measures of its reliability and validity relative to influenza vaccine uptake and COVID-19 vaccination acceptance in cross-sectional internet surveys in the United States and in China. We assessed the impact of vaccine hesitancy on influenza and COVID-19 vaccination using multivariable regression modeling, which informed concurrent validity of the adult Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (aVHS). Among 1103 participants in the March 2020 China survey, 5.4% would not accept a COVID-19 vaccine, whereas this figure was 18.8% for the March 2020 US survey and 27.3% for the June 2020 US survey. The aVHS exhibits good internal consistency in all three surveys. Models adjusted for age, gender and income level show that prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was a fraction as high in those who scored higher on the VHS than those who scored lower on all three surveys. Prevalence of past and future flu vaccine acceptance was a fraction as high in those with higher aVHS scores than those with lower scores. Prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance is lower in those with higher vaccine hesitancy scores, which supports the scale's concurrent validity. The aVHS exhibits good internal consistency, making it a valid and reliable tool for measuring vaccination uptake.