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., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objectives The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommend that pregnant women receive the Tdap vaccine during every pregnancy. The objectives of this paper are to evaluate disparities in Tdap vaccination among pregnant women in the U.S., and to assess whether race/ethnicity and other characteristics are associated with factors that inform pregnant women's decisions about Tdap vaccination. Methods We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional web-based survey of pregnant women in the U.S. during June-July 2014. The primary outcome was self-reported vaccination status with Tdap during pregnancy, categorized as vaccinated, unvaccinated with intent to be vaccinated during the current pregnancy, and unvaccinated with no intent to be vaccinated during the current pregnancy. Secondary outcomes included factors that influenced women's decisions about vaccination and information needs. We used multivariable logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios for associations between race/ethnicity and the outcomes. Results Among pregnant women who completed the survey, 41% (95% CI 36-45%) reported that they had received Tdap during the current pregnancy. Among those women in the third trimester at the time of survey, 52% (95% CI 43-60%) had received Tdap during the current pregnancy. Hispanic women had higher Tdap vaccination than white women and black women (53%, p < 0.05, compared with 38 and 36%, respectively). In logistic regression models adjusting for maternal age, geographic region, education, and income, Hispanic women were more likely to have been vaccinated with Tdap compared with white women (aOR 2.29, 95% CI 1.20-4.37). Higher income and residing in the western U.S. were also independently associated with Tdap vaccination during pregnancy. Twenty-six percent of surveyed women had not been vaccinated with Tdap yet but intended to receive the vaccine during the current pregnancy; this proportion did not differ significantly by race/ethnicity. The most common factor that influenced women to get vaccinated was a health care provider (HCP) recommendation. The most common reason for not getting vaccinated was a concern about safety of the vaccine. Conclusions This study found that some disparities exist in Tdap vaccination among pregnant women in the U.S., and HCPs have an important role in providing information and recommendations about the maternal Tdap recommendation to pregnant women so they can make informed vaccination decisions.

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An attenuated SARS-CoV-2 virus with modified viral transcriptional regulatory sequences and deletion of open-reading frames 3, 6, 7 and 8 (∆3678) was previously reported to protect hamsters from SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission. Here we report that a single-dose intranasal vaccination of ∆3678 protects K18-hACE2 mice from wild-type or variant SARS-CoV-2 challenge. Compared with wild-type virus infection, the ∆3678 vaccination induces equivalent or higher levels of lung and systemic T cell, B cell, IgA, and IgG responses. The results suggest ∆3678 as an attractive mucosal vaccine candidate to boost pulmonary immunity against SARS-CoV-2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]