Search

Abstract The adoption of a stakeholder approach to public engagement within the public sector has been extensive. However, there remain critical gaps in the understanding of stakeholder participation arising from hidden disparities that contribute to unequal access to communication channels, information, and hence ultimately knowledge and decision making. The term “epistemic injustice” has been used to describe such inequality of access and consequently, the outcome that ensues. Epistemic injustice is much overlooked in stakeholder theory. This article shows how epistemic injustice can act as a barrier to effective stakeholder engagement and hence to successful public policy formulation and implementation. We use the case of vaccine hesitancy among Scotland’s African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) communities to illustrate this problem of unequal participation. The study drew on primary data involving 85 participants and secondary data sources from extant literature and explored salient factors shaping barriers to vaccine uptake during the recent pandemic. The findings demonstrate how the failure to grasp epistemic injustice undermines the effectiveness of the stakeholder approach, even with the most well-intentioned efforts. We argue that epistemic injustice is a critical barrier to effective stakeholder approaches.

The adoption of a stakeholder approach to public engagement within the public sector has been extensive. However, there remain critical gaps in the understanding of stakeholder participation arising from hidden disparities that contribute to unequal access to communication channels, information, and hence ultimately knowledge and decision making. The term "epistemic injustice" has been used to describe such inequality of access and consequently, the outcome that ensues. Epistemic injustice is much overlooked in stakeholder theory. This article shows how epistemic injustice can act as a barrier to effective stakeholder engagement and hence to successful public policy formulation and implementation. We use the case of vaccine hesitancy among Scotland's African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) communities to illustrate this problem of unequal participation. The study drew on primary data involving 85 participants and secondary data sources from extant literature and explored salient factors shaping barriers to vaccine uptake during the recent pandemic. The findings demonstrate how the failure to grasp epistemic injustice undermines the effectiveness of the stakeholder approach, even with the most well-intentioned efforts. We argue that epistemic injustice is a critical barrier to effective stakeholder approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated existing healthcare disparities among American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations rooted in historical traumas and systemic marginalization. Methods: This study conducted at a single Indian Health Service (IHS) clinic in central Michigan evaluates two educational interventions for enhancing COVID-19 knowledge and attitudes in a sample AI/AN population. Utilizing a pre/post-intervention prospective study design, participants received either a video or infographic educational intervention, followed by a survey assessing their COVID-19 knowledge and attitudes. Results: The results indicate significant improvements in knowledge and attitudes post-intervention, with both modalities proving effective. However, specific factors such as gender, political affiliation, and place of residence influenced COVID-19 attitudes and knowledge, emphasizing the importance of tailored interventions. Conclusions: Despite limitations, this study highlights the critical role of educational interventions in addressing vaccine hesitancy and promoting health equity within AI/AN communities. Moving forward, comprehensive strategies involving increased Indian Health Service funding, culturally relevant interventions, and policy advocacy are crucial in mitigating healthcare disparities and promoting health equity within AI/AN communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and Objectives: To investigate whether chronic diseases are associated with higher COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy and explore factors that influence COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy in patients with chronic diseases. Background: Vaccine hesitancy has been acknowledged as one of the greatest hazards to public health. However, little information is available about COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy among patients with chronic diseases who may be more susceptible to COVID‐19 infection, severe disease or death. Methods: From 6 to 9 August 2021, we performed an internet‐based cross‐sectional survey with 22,954 participants (14.78% participants with chronic diseases). Propensity score matching with 1:1 nearest neighbourhood was used to reduce confounding factors between patients with chronic diseases and the general population. Using a multivariable logistic regression model, the factors impacting COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy were identified among patients with chronic diseases. Results: Both before and after propensity score matching, patients with chronic diseases had higher COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy than the general population. In addition, self‐reported poor health, multiple chronic diseases, lower sociodemographic backgrounds and lower trust in nurses and doctors were associated with COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy among patients with chronic diseases. Conclusions: Patients with chronic diseases were more hesitant about the COVID‐19 vaccine. Nurses should focus on patients with chronic diseases with poor health conditions, low socioeconomic backgrounds and low trust in the healthcare system. Relevance to Clinical Practice: Clinical nurses are recommended to not only pay more attention to the health status and sociodemographic characteristics of patients with chronic diseases but also build trust between nurses and patients by improving service levels and professional capabilities in clinical practice. Patient or Public Contribution: Patients or the public were not involved in setting the research question, the outcome measures, or the design or implementation of the study. However, all participants were invited to complete the digital informed consent and questionnaires. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: South Africa faced challenges while implementing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) measures such as mass vaccination. Some people rejected or were hesitant to receive government-recommended vaccines. This study explored COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among unvaccinated individuals in a primary care setting in Pretoria, South Africa. Methods: This was an exploratory phenomenological study that included one-on-one interviews with 12 individuals at Temba Community Health Centre in Pretoria, South Africa. Results: The research revealed five themes: perceptions of COVID-19 disease, perceptions of COVID-19 vaccine, factors related to non-vaccination, information sources about the COVID-19 vaccine, and long-term vaccination decisions. There were seven linked sub-themes. Conclusion: Overall, participants had a good understanding of COVID-19 disease, but limited knowledge about the vaccine, causing hesitancy to get vaccinated. Reasons for not getting vaccinated included health-related concerns, safety concerns, personal experiences, and social and political factors. Safety and health-related concerns were prevalent, with adverse vaccine outcomes being the most common concern. Most participants had experienced a historic encounter with a vaccine-related death or illness. Contribution: Vaccine hesitancy should be viewed as a powerful concern from the community, and a key source of worry for the health authorities over any vaccine-related doubt.

Abstract Background The best chance of eradicating the COVID-19 pandemic lies in a successful vaccination campaign against the virus. There is still hesitancy among some of the Malawians over the use of COVID-19 vaccines that are readily available. This review’s objective was to currently analyze COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among Malawians. Methods This scoping review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Reviews. An electronic database search was performed using CINAHL, OVID Medline, PubMed, and Google Scholar for studies published between January 1, 2020, and July 10, 2023, on the topic of reluctance toward COVID-19 vaccine in Malawi. A review of the journal titles and abstracts was performed to establish a match within the selection criteria. Based on the parameters of interest, this paper included publications that explicitly mentioned COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Malawi. Results A total of seven articles were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. Some of the eligible Malawian population’s poor response to COVID-19 vaccination was due to hesitancy. Misinformation is primarily to blame for COVID-19 vaccine reluctance. COVID-19 vaccines are viewed as dangerous or intended to cause harm such as the myth that the COVID-19 vaccine would cause infertility, severe disability, and even death. The review revealed that some people choose not to receive vaccines due to religious convictions and beliefs. Some individuals also think that getting the COVID-19 vaccine could result in receiving a triple-six (666) mark from the devil. There were also reports that the COVID-19 vaccination is being considered experimental and ineffective. Conclusions The Malawi government should focus on fear and misinformation regarding COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, using interventions, motivational interviews, and individual sensitization. Traditional, religious, and youth-led organizations should provide practical information on COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy.

Background: The best chance of eradicating the COVID-19 pandemic lies in a successful vaccination campaign against the virus. There is still hesitancy among some of the Malawians over the use of COVID-19 vaccines that are readily available. This review's objective was to currently analyze COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among Malawians. Methods: This scoping review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Reviews. An electronic database search was performed using CINAHL, OVID Medline, PubMed, and Google Scholar for studies published between January 1, 2020, and July 10, 2023, on the topic of reluctance toward COVID-19 vaccine in Malawi. A review of the journal titles and abstracts was performed to establish a match within the selection criteria. Based on the parameters of interest, this paper included publications that explicitly mentioned COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Malawi. Results: A total of seven articles were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. Some of the eligible Malawian population's poor response to COVID-19 vaccination was due to hesitancy. Misinformation is primarily to blame for COVID-19 vaccine reluctance. COVID-19 vaccines are viewed as dangerous or intended to cause harm such as the myth that the COVID-19 vaccine would cause infertility, severe disability, and even death. The review revealed that some people choose not to receive vaccines due to religious convictions and beliefs. Some individuals also think that getting the COVID-19 vaccine could result in receiving a triple-six (666) mark from the devil. There were also reports that the COVID-19 vaccination is being considered experimental and ineffective. Conclusions: The Malawi government should focus on fear and misinformation regarding COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, using interventions, motivational interviews, and individual sensitization. Traditional, religious, and youth-led organizations should provide practical information on COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The unexpected emergence of novel coronavirus identified as SAR- CoV-2 virus (severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2) disrupted the world order to an extent that the human activities that are core to survival came almost to a halt. The COVID-19 pandemic created an insurmountable global health crisis that led to a united front among all nations to research on effective pharmaceutical measures that could stop COVID-19 proliferation. Consequently, different types of vaccines were discovered (single-dose and double-dose vaccines). However, the speed at which these vaccines were developed and approved to be administered created other challenges (vaccine skepticism and hesitancy). Method: This paper therefore tracks the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 using a non-linear deterministic system that accounts for the unwillingness of both susceptible and partially vaccinated individuals to receive either single- dose or double-dose vaccines (vaccine hesitancy). Further the model is extended to incorporate three time-dependent non-pharmaceutical and pharmaceutical intervention controls, namely preventive control, control associated with screening-management of both truly asymptomatic and symptomatic infectious individuals and control associated with vaccination of susceptible individuals with a single dose vaccine. The Pontryagin's Maximum Principle is applied to establish the optimality conditions associated with the optimal controls. Results: If COVID-19 vaccines administered are imperfect and transient then there exist a parameter space where backward bifurcation occurs. Time profile projections depict that in a setting where vaccine hesitancy is present, administering single dose vaccines leads to a significant reduction of COVID-19 prevalence than when double dose vaccines are administered. Comparison of the impact of vaccine hesitancy against either single dose or double dose on COVID-19 prevalence reveals that vaccine hesitancy against single dose is more detrimental than vaccine hesitancy against a double dose vaccine. Optimal analysis results reveal that non-pharmaceutical time- dependent control significantly flattens the COVID-19 epidemic curve when compared with pharmaceutical controls. Cost-effectiveness assessment suggest that non-pharmaceutical control is the most cost-effective COVID-19 mitigation strategy that should be implemented in a setting where resources are limited. Discussion: Policy makers and medical practitioners should assess the level of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy inorder to decide on the type of vaccine (single-dose or double-dose) to administer to the population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Introduction: The present study adapted the Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs Scale (VCBS) developed by Shapiro and colleagues (2016) in the specific context of COVID-19 and examined the psychometric properties of an Italian version of the scale (VCBS-COVID19/Ita). Methods: We modified the 7 items of the VCBS to address conspiracy beliefs specifically regarding COVID-19 vaccines and translated them into Italian. We collected the data from a group of 1,179 subjects (73% female). We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the dimensional structure of the VCBS-COVID19/Ita and multigroup CFA (MG CFA) to evaluate the measurement invariance across gender. Results: We found support for a one-factor solution for the VCBS-COVID19/Ita. The one-factor model was factorially invariant across gender. Additionally, we determined the VCBS-COVID19/Ita scores to be associated with COVID-VAX dimensions, providing support for the convergent and divergent validity of the Italian version of the VCBS-COVID19. Discussion: Our results provide evidence that the Italian version of the VCBS-COVID19 is reliable, valid, and, thus, potentially useful for research on COVID-19. Study limitations and future research directions are discussed.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated existing healthcare disparities among American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations rooted in historical traumas and systemic marginalization. Methods: This study conducted at a single Indian Health Service (IHS) clinic in central Michigan evaluates two educational interventions for enhancing COVID-19 knowledge and attitudes in a sample AI/AN population. Utilizing a pre/post-intervention prospective study design, participants received either a video or infographic educational intervention, followed by a survey assessing their COVID-19 knowledge and attitudes. Results: The results indicate significant improvements in knowledge and attitudes post-intervention, with both modalities proving effective. However, specific factors such as gender, political affiliation, and place of residence influenced COVID-19 attitudes and knowledge, emphasizing the importance of tailored interventions. Conclusions: Despite limitations, this study highlights the critical role of educational interventions in addressing vaccine hesitancy and promoting health equity within AI/AN communities. Moving forward, comprehensive strategies involving increased Indian Health Service funding, culturally relevant interventions, and policy advocacy are crucial in mitigating healthcare disparities and promoting health equity within AI/AN communities.

PurposeYoung adults have the highest cumulative incidence of COVID-19 infection in the country. Using March 2021 Household Pulse Survey data, an ongoing, cross-sectional nationally representative survey, we examined U.S. young adult intention to accept COVID-19 vaccines.MethodsYoung adult (ages 18-25 years) Household Pulse Survey participants were queried on intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and related perspectives (N = 5,082).ResultsMost unvaccinated respondents (76%) indicated an intention to become vaccinated. The most frequently cited reasons for potentially rejecting vaccination included desire to wait and see if the vaccine is safe (56%); concerns over side effects (53%); and believing others are in greater need of the vaccine (44%).ConclusionsWith 24% of young adults hesitant to accept a COVID-19 vaccine, public health interventions should target reasons for hesitancy, address concerns about safety and side effects, and underscore the importance of vaccinations for this population.

IntroductionThe unexpected emergence of novel coronavirus identified as SAR-CoV-2 virus (severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2) disrupted the world order to an extent that the human activities that are core to survival came almost to a halt. The COVID-19 pandemic created an insurmountable global health crisis that led to a united front among all nations to research on effective pharmaceutical measures that could stop COVID-19 proliferation. Consequently, different types of vaccines were discovered (single-dose and double-dose vaccines). However, the speed at which these vaccines were developed and approved to be administered created other challenges (vaccine skepticism and hesitancy).MethodThis paper therefore tracks the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 using a non-linear deterministic system that accounts for the unwillingness of both susceptible and partially vaccinated individuals to receive either single-dose or double-dose vaccines (vaccine hesitancy). Further the model is extended to incorporate three time-dependent non-pharmaceutical and pharmaceutical intervention controls, namely preventive control, control associated with screening-management of both truly asymptomatic and symptomatic infectious individuals and control associated with vaccination of susceptible individuals with a single dose vaccine. The Pontryagin's Maximum Principle is applied to establish the optimality conditions associated with the optimal controls.ResultsIf COVID-19 vaccines administered are imperfect and transient then there exist a parameter space where backward bifurcation occurs. Time profile projections depict that in a setting where vaccine hesitancy is present, administering single dose vaccines leads to a significant reduction of COVID-19 prevalence than when double dose vaccines are administered. Comparison of the impact of vaccine hesitancy against either single dose or double dose on COVID-19 prevalence reveals that vaccine hesitancy against single dose is more detrimental than vaccine hesitancy against a double dose vaccine. Optimal analysis results reveal that non-pharmaceutical time-dependent control significantly flattens the COVID-19 epidemic curve when compared with pharmaceutical controls. Cost-effectiveness assessment suggest that non-pharmaceutical control is the most cost-effective COVID-19 mitigation strategy that should be implemented in a setting where resources are limited.DiscussionPolicy makers and medical practitioners should assess the level of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy inorder to decide on the type of vaccine (single-dose or double-dose) to administer to the population.

Abstract:Introduction: The present study adapted the Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs Scale (VCBS) developed by Shapiro and colleagues (2016) in the specific context of COVID-19 and examined the psychometric properties of an Italian version of the scale (VCBS-COVID19/Ita). Methods: We modified the 7 items of the VCBS to address conspiracy beliefs specifically regarding COVID-19 vaccines and translated them into Italian. We collected the data from a group of 1,179 subjects (73% female). We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the dimensional structure of the VCBS-COVID19/Ita and multigroup CFA (MG CFA) to evaluate the measurement invariance across gender. Results: We found support for a one-factor solution for the VCBS-COVID19/Ita. The one-factor model was factorially invariant across gender. Additionally, we determined the VCBS-COVID19/Ita scores to be associated with COVID-VAX dimensions, providing support for the convergent and divergent validity of the Italian version of the VCBS-COVID19. Discussion: Our results provide evidence that the Italian version of the VCBS-COVID19 is reliable, valid, and, thus, potentially useful for research on COVID-19. Study limitations and future research directions are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined the way attitudes towards science in the U.S. mediate the relationship between COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and psychosocial predictors, such as political ideology, religiosity, reactance proneness, dogmatism, perceived communal ostracism, education, and socioeconomic status. We analyzed the structure of people's attitudes towards science, revealing four distinct factors: epistemic confidence, belief that science and technology are beneficial, trust in science in general, and trust in medical science. With all four factors included as mediators in a saturated path analysis, low levels of trust in medical science and low epistemic confidence fully mediated the relationships between nearly all of the psychosocial predictors and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Political conservativism's negative association with vaccine hesitancy was partially mediated by the same two facets of people's attitudes towards science. Adding nuance to existing research, we found that trust in science in general was not a significant mediator once all four facets were included in the model. These findings are discussed with a focus on their implications for understanding attitudes towards science and their substantial and complex role in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This cross-sectional survey examined the predictive influence of personality traits and fear of COVID-19 on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among undergraduate students in Abeokuta, Nigeria. Methods: Three hundred and ninety-two participants (267 females and 122 males, mean age ± SD = 20.33 ± 2.55 years) completed a two-section questionnaire collecting data regarding demographic information, personality factors, fear of COVID-19, and vaccine hesitancy. Data were analysed using SPSS v.25. Results: The results showed significant joint and independent prediction of personality traits on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (R2 = .27; F= (5,386) = 28.957, p<.05). There was a significant difference in the vaccine hesitancy reported by participants who scored high and those low on fear of COVID-19 (t (390) = 2.53, p= <.05). There was a significant difference between male participants compared to the female participants on vaccine hesitancy (t (387) = -2.058, p= <.05). The results on the difference between students in the different schools on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy showed no significant difference between private university students and public university students (t (390) = -.137, p= >.05). There was a significant difference between Christian participants and the Muslim participants on vaccine hesitancy (t (389) = -3.195, p= <.05). Conclusion: Personality traits are vital influences associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among undergraduate students in Ogun State. The study recommends that other studies incorporate more participants from various universities in Nigeria to cut across cultures. This will make for credibility in the generalization of the findings to the general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The urgency of the COVID-19 pandemic called upon the joint efforts from the scientific and private sectors to work together to track vaccine acceptance and prevention behaviors. Methods Our study utilized individual responses to the Delphi Group at Carnegie Mellon University U.S. COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey, in partnership with Facebook. We retrieved survey data from January 2021 to February 2022 (n = 13,426,245) to examine contextual and individual-level predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, vaccination, and mask wearing in the United States. Adjusted logistic regression models were developed to examine individual and ZIP code predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and vaccination status. Given the COVID-19 vaccine was rolled out in phases in the U.S. we conducted analyses stratified by time, January 2021-May 2021 (Time 1) and June 2021-February 2022 (Time 2). Results In January 2021 only 9% of U.S. Facebook respondents reported receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, and 45% were vaccine hesitant. By February 2022, 80% of U.S. Facebook respondents were vaccinated and only 18% were vaccine hesitant. Individuals who were older, held higher educational degrees, worked in white collar jobs, wore a mask most or all the time, and identified as white and Asian had higher COVID-19 vaccination rates and lower vaccine hesitancy across Time 1 and Time 2. Essential workers and blue-collar occupations had lower COVID vaccinations and higher vaccine hesitancy. By Time 2, all adults were eligible for the COVID-19 vaccine, but blacks and multiracial individuals had lower vaccination and higher vaccine hesitancy compared to whites. Those 55 years and older and females had higher odds of wearing masks most or all the time. Protective service, construction, and installation and repair occupations had lower odds of wearing masks. ZIP Code level percentage of the population with a bachelors’ which was associated with mask wearing, higher vaccination, and lower vaccine hesitancy. Conclusion Associations found in earlier phases of the pandemic were generally found to also be present later in the pandemic, indicating stability in inequities. Additionally, inequities in these important outcomes suggests more work is needed to bridge gaps to ensure that the burden of COVID-19 risk does not disproportionately fall upon subgroups of the population.

Aim: Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy can be an obstacle to the global effort to control the current pandemic. The study aimed to test the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Oxford Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale. Design: A methodological and descriptive study. Methods: The research was conducted as a methodological and descriptive study. The sample size consisted of 476 academics who voluntarily agreed to participate in the research and completed the online questionnaire between February and March 2021. Results: As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the fit index values obtained by making two modifications of the one-dimensional Oxford Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale were found to be χ2/df = 1.86; AGFI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.04; GFI = 0.98; CFI = 0.99 and IFI = 0.99. The Cronbachʼs alpha internal consistency coefficient of the scale was calculated as 0.95. Test-retest reliability coefficient of the scale was r = 0.93 (p < 0.001). Conclusion: It can be concluded that the Oxford Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, adapted to Turkish, is a valid and reliable measurement tool for determining hesitancy of Turkish society towards covid-19 vaccines.

Vaccine hesitancy presents a challenge to COVID-19 control efforts. To identify beliefs associated with delayed vaccine uptake, we developed and implemented a vaccine hesitancy survey for the COVID-19 Community Research Partnership. In June 2021, we assessed attitudes and beliefs associated with COVID-19 vaccination using an online survey. Self-reported vaccination data were requested daily through October 2021. We compared responses between vaccinated and unvaccinated respondents using absolute standardized mean differences (ASMD). We assessed validity and reliability using exploratory factor analysis and identified latent factors associated with a subset of survey items. Cox proportional hazards models and mediation analyses assessed predictors of subsequent vaccination among those initially unvaccinated. In June 2021, 29,522 vaccinated and 1,272 unvaccinated participants completed surveys. Among those unvaccinated in June 2021, 559 (43.9 %) became vaccinated by October 31, 2021. In June, unvaccinated participants were less likely to feel "very concerned" about getting COVID-19 than vaccinated participants (10.6 % vs. 43.3 %, ASMD 0.792). Among those initially unvaccinated, greater intent to become vaccinated was associated with getting vaccinated and shorter time to vaccination. However, even among participants who reported no intention to become vaccinated, 28.5 % reported vaccination before study end. Two latent factors predicted subsequent vaccination—being 'more receptive' was derived from motivation to protect one's own or others' health and resume usual activities; being 'less receptive' was derived from concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. In a Cox model, both factors were partially mediated by vaccination intention. This study characterizes vaccine hesitant individuals and identifies predictors of eventual COVID-19 vaccination through October 31, 2021. Even individuals with no intention to be vaccinated can shift to vaccine uptake. Our data suggest factors of perceived severity of COVID-19 disease, vaccine safety, and trust in the vaccine development process are predictive of vaccination and may be important opportunities for ongoing interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Drawing from the Health Belief Model, we explored how disadvantaged groups in the U.S., including Black, Hispanic, less educated and wealthy individuals, experienced perceived barriers and cues to action in the context of the COVID-19 vaccination. Design: A cross-sectional survey administered in March 2021. Setting: USA Subjects: A national sample of U.S. residents (n = 795) recruited from Prolific. Measures: Perceived barriers (clinical, access, trust, religion/spiritual), cues to action (authorities, social circles), attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination. Analysis: Factor analysis and Structural Equation Model (SEM) were performed in STATA 16. Results: Black and less educated individuals experienced higher clinical barriers (CI [.012,.33]; CI [.027,.10]), trust barriers (CI [.49,.92]; CI [.057,.16]), and religious/spiritual barriers (CI [.28,.66]; CI [.026,.11]). Hispanics experienced lower levels of clinical barriers (CI [-.42,.0001]). Clinical, trust, and religious/spiritual barriers were negatively related to attitudes toward vaccination (CI [-.45, −.15]; CI [-.79, −.51]; CI [-.43, −.13]). Black and less educated individuals experienced fewer cues to action by authority (CI [-.47, −.083]; CI [-.093, −.002]) and social ties (CI [-.75, −.33]; CI [-.18, −.080]). Lower-income individuals experienced fewer cues to action by social ties (CI [-.097, −.032]). Cues from social ties were positively associated with vaccination attitudes (CI [.065,.26]). Conclusion: Communication should be personalized to address perceived barriers disadvantaged groups differentially experience and use sources who exert influences on these groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the magnitude of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its associated factors among adolescents in Seka Chekorsa town, Jimma, Ethiopia. Methods: Institutional-based cross-sectional study employing both qualitative and quantitative methods were used. The study participants were selected using a simple random sampling technique. Data were collected using interviewer-administered questions. Data collected was checked for completeness and entered into EPI data version 3.1. Finally, data were exported to SPSS version 25 for further analysis. The bivariate analysis was used to identify variables eligible for multivariate logistic regressions. In a multivariable analysis to identify factors that have statistically significant association, a p value less than 0.05 and a 95% confidence interval were used. The qualitative data were triangulated with quantitative data. Results: In this study, 379 adolescents were participated, yielding a response rate of 95.2%. The magnitude of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adolescents was 29% (95% CI: 24.3– 33.5%). Being female (AOR = 1.89, 95%, 1.81– 3.56), primary education (AOR = 2.99, 95% CI: 1.26– 3.56), source information from social media (AOR = 2.42, 95% CI: 1.06– 5.57), poor knowledge about COVID-19 disease (AOR = 3.18, 95% CI: 1.66– 6.12), unfavorable attitude (AOR = 5.2, 95% CI: 2.76– 9.79) and poor knowledge towards COVID-19 vaccine (AOR = 5.66, 95% CI, 2.91– 11.0) were associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adolescents. Conclusion: This study shows that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adolescents is very high. Being female, poor knowledge towards COVID-19 disease and the vaccine, an unfavorable attitude and social media were factors significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Vaccination is an important measure for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In the present study, we aimed to evaluate parents' attitudes toward vaccinating themselves and their children. We also searched whether information about the multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a severe complication of COVID-19, could change parents' decisions on vaccinating their children. Methods A questionnaire form consisting of sociodemographic features, COVID-19 vaccination practices, and knowledge about MIS-C was applied to parents of children attending Bezmialem Vakıf University Hospital from March through June 2022. Factors affecting vaccine hesitancy were evaluated. Results Among 383 parents, COVID-19 history was present in 248 (64.8%), and 165 (43.1%) were hesitant to vaccinate themselves. The number of cases where both parents had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine was 256/354 (72.3%). The most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy were vaccines being new in 53/165 (32.1%) and fears of side effects in 95/165 (57.6%). Parents' hesitation toward vaccination of their children with the COVID-19 vaccine was highest for the 0 to 6 age group (78.9%) (73.6% in the 6–12 age group, and 47.3% in the 12–18 age group). In total, 365/383 (95.3%) parents did not have an opinion about MIS-C. After information was given, 62.5% of the 302 participants who opposed vaccinating children under 6 years changed their decision to have their children vaccinated. Conclusion Although routine childhood vaccinations were performed in 99% of children, more than half of parents were hesitant to vaccinate their children with the COVID-19 vaccine. The majority did not have an opinion about MIS-C. Briefings by pediatricians about complications of COVID-19 will help avoid vaccine hesitancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic aggravated existing challenges for racial/ethnic minority immigrants in the U.S. in obtaining health information and seeking health care. Based on in-depth interviews with 49 racial/ethnic minority immigrants in the U.S. Midwest, this study examines how they navigated online health information related to general health issues and in particular COVID-19, how they encounter online misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccination and their willingness to get vaccinated. Results show that participants use online health information from both the U.S. and their home country to stay informed about the pandemic, but often encounter misinformation and hate speech online. Further, participants are hesitant to correct misinformation due to contentious online environment. Additionally, findings revealed that younger participants tended to be less willing to get vaccinated due to low perceived benefits. The study suggests scholarly and practical implications for those who work in the area of health communication, digital media messaging and minority communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scant research exists on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among law enforcement officers, hindering health messaging development for officers and, by extension, the communities they serve. This paper's goal was to address this gap by providing the necessary data to better under hesitancy to guide training and policy interventions for officers. The objective was to conduct the first nationally representative survey of officers on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its correlates. We collected data from February 2021 to March 2022 on officer COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and examined their responses in terms of sociodemographic factors, health status, and job characteristics. We found that 40% of officers were COVID-19 vaccine hesitant. We found that officers with higher education, older officers, officers with more law enforcement experience, officers who received recent health checkups, and commanders (compared to line officers) were less likely to be COVID-19 vaccine hesitant. Critically, officers working in law enforcement agencies that provided masks for COVID-19 protection were less likely to be COVID-19 vaccine hesitant (compared to agencies not providing masks). Ongoing research is needed to understand how evolving attitudes and barriers toward vaccination change over time for officers and to test messaging to better align officers with health guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Infodemics create a false sense of panic, distrust and safety concerns. • We employed a moderated-mediation model of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. • Conspiracy beliefs and religious fatalism alter COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. • Digital-informational support and psychological well-being trigger vaccine acceptance. • Our findings validate digital interventions as reliable life-saving COVID-19 knowledge. Guarding against an anti-science camouflage within infodemics is paramount for sustaining the global vaccination drive. Vaccine hesitancy remains a growing concern and a significant threat to public health, especially in developing countries. Infodemics, conspiracy beliefs and religious fatalism primarily fuel vaccine hesitancy. In addition, anti-vaccine disinformation, lack of understanding, and erroneous religious beliefs also trigger vaccine hesitancy. Global behavioral strategies such as wearing face masks and long-term preventive measures (i.e., COVID-19 vaccination) have effectively limited the virus's spread. Despite the alarming rate of global deaths (i.e., over 99% being unvaccinated), a large proportion of the global population remains reluctant to vaccinate. New evidence validates the usefulness of technology-driven communication strategies (i.e., digital interventions) to address the complex socio-psychological influence of the pandemic. Hence, the present research explored the digital information processing model to assess the interface between informational support (through digital interventions) and antecedents of vaccine hesitancy. This research involved two separate studies: a focus group to operationalize the construct of infodemics, which remained ambiguous in previous literature (Study 1), followed by a cross-sectional survey (Study 2) to examine the conceptual model. Data were collected from 1906 respondents through a standard questionnaire administered online. The focus group's findings revealed a multi-dimensional nature of infodemics that was also validated in Study 2. The cross-sectional survey results substantiated infodemics, religious fatalism and conspiracy beliefs as significant predictors of vaccine hesitancy. Similarly, conspiracy beliefs negatively influence an individual's psychological well-being. Furthermore, information support (through digital intervention) affected infodemics and religious fatalism, whereas it inversely influenced the strength of their relationships with vaccine hesitancy. Information support (through digital intervention) also moderated the relationship between conspiracy beliefs and psychological well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: When vaccination depends on injection, it is plausible that the blood-injection-injury cluster of fears may contribute to hesitancy. Our primary aim was to estimate in the UK adult population the proportion of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy explained by blood-injection-injury fears. Methods: In total, 15 014 UK adults, quota sampled to match the population for age, gender, ethnicity, income and region, took part (19 January–5 February 2021) in a non-probability online survey. The Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale assessed intent to be vaccinated. Two scales (Specific Phobia Scale-blood-injection-injury phobia and Medical Fear Survey–injections and blood subscale) assessed blood-injection-injury fears. Four items from these scales were used to create a factor score specifically for injection fears. Results: In total, 3927 (26.2%) screened positive for blood-injection-injury phobia. Individuals screening positive (22.0%) were more likely to report COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy compared to individuals screening negative (11.5%), odds ratio = 2.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.97–2.40, p < 0.001. The population attributable fraction (PAF) indicated that if blood-injection-injury phobia were absent then this may prevent 11.5% of all instances of vaccine hesitancy, AF = 0.11; 95% CI 0.09–0.14, p < 0.001. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was associated with higher scores on the Specific Phobia Scale, r = 0.22, p < 0.001, Medical Fear Survey, r = 0.23, p = <0.001 and injection fears, r = 0.25, p < 0.001. Injection fears were higher in youth and in Black and Asian ethnic groups, and explained a small degree of why vaccine hesitancy is higher in these groups. Conclusions: Across the adult population, blood-injection-injury fears may explain approximately 10% of cases of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Addressing such fears will likely improve the effectiveness of vaccination programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Herd immunity for COVID-19 is the ultimate goal to end the pandemic. Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has been a subject of considerable debate regarding vaccines effectiveness. This ongoing discussion and other evolving variables contribute to the hesitancy toward vaccines and levels of vaccination acceptance among both the healthcare workers and the public. This study was conducted to assess COVID-19 vaccine uptake and hesitancy among the Saudi Arabian population during the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant. Methods: A national cross-sectional survey conducted between June 28 and July 5, 2021. The survey collected sociodemographic information, personal and family history of previous COVID-19 infection, adherence to precautionary measures, COVID-19 vaccination status, parental willingness to vaccinate their teenage children, and address variable associated with hesitancy to receive vaccination. Results: Among the 4071 participants, 67 % were women, 86 % of the participants received COVID-19 vaccine, 70 % had very high or high commitment with COVID-19 precautionary measures. On multivariate analysis, vaccine hesitancy was less likely in men (OR 0.652, p-value

• Rate of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is about 50% among pregnant women in Tehran. • Most common reason reported for vaccine refusal was fear of vaccine effects on the fetus. • Education level and occupational status are predictive of vaccine acceptance. • Access to internet and social media is higher among vaccinated women. Evaluation of covid‑19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women and their reported reasons for vaccine refusal. This prospective study was performed in Arash women's Hospital, Tehran, Iran, between December 1, 2021 and January 1, 2022. All pregnant women who were attended to prenatal care unit were considered eligible for inclusion. A validated questionnaire was used for data gathering. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants. Finally, 477 pregnant women were recruited and were divided into two groups according the status of vaccine acceptance (237 accepted and 240 women refused vaccination). The mean age of accepted participants was higher (31.65 ± 5.69 vs 30.39 ± 5.5; P = 0.01). There was a significant statistical difference between the groups regarding education level. Access to internet and social media were also significantly different between the two groups (94.8% in accepted vs 86.6% in refused group; P = 0.002). There was more rate of severe COVID-19 infection in friends or relatives of accepted group (50% vs 38%). we did not find any statistically significant differences in obstetric characteristics and the rate of obstetric complications between the two groups. The most common reasons reported by participants for vaccine refusal, was fear of vaccination side effects on the fetus (86.5%), and the less common reported reasons were husband's disagreement (9.7%), use of traditional medicine (5.6%), religious beliefs (3.7%), and information obtained from social media (2.8%). After advices from medical staff, most of these mothers (86.5%) still refused vaccination. Based on the results of the present study, rate of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was about 50% and its most common reported reason was fear of probable side effects of vaccine on the fetus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the current COVID-19 post-pandemic era, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is hindering the herd immunity generated by widespread vaccination. It is critical to identify the factors that may cause COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, enabling the relevant authorities to propose appropriate interventions for mitigating such a phenomenon. Keyword extraction, a sub-field of natural language processing (NLP) applications, plays a vital role in modern medical informatics. When traditional corpus-based NLP methods are used to conduct keyword extraction, they only consider a word's log-likelihood value to determine whether it is a keyword, which leaves room for concerns about the efficiency and accuracy of this keyword extraction technique. These concerns include the fact that the method is unable to (1) optimize the keyword list by the machine-based approach, (2) effectively evaluate the keyword's importance level, and (3) integrate the variables to conduct data clustering. Thus, to address the aforementioned issues, this study integrated a machine-based word removal technique, the i10-index, and the importance–performance analysis (IPA) technique to develop an improved corpus-based NLP method for facilitating keyword extraction. The top 200 most-cited Science Citation Index (SCI) research articles discussing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were adopted as the target corpus for verification. The results showed that the keywords of Quadrant I (n = 98) reached the highest lexical coverage (9.81%), indicating that the proposed method successfully identified and extracted the most important keywords from the target corpus, thus achieving more domain-oriented and accurate keyword extraction results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To date, extensive research has been conducted on vaccination against COVID-19 during pregnancy to verify the safety and efficacy of the vaccines, despite the fact that pregnant women were excluded from the initial clinical trials. The ever-increasing number of scientific publications has confirmed the absence of biological mechanisms associating mRNA vaccines with adverse effects in pregnancy and breastfeeding, although few studies have been carried out on their effect on fertility. While the Italian legal system provides for maternity protection measures and indemnity for vaccination damages pursuant to law no. 210/1992, it is not exempt from controversy. This contribution describes the state of play on COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant and lactating women, including: current recommendations for pregnant and lactating women; ethical issues related to vaccination hesitancy among pregnant women; the legislative paradox whereby sanctions may be imposed on women in certain professional categories who refuse vaccination because they are pregnant; and the possible legal consequences in the event of harm to the unborn child due to vaccination. All of this is considered in accordance with the principles of medical ethics, taking into account the national legislation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vaccine uptake and coverage in susceptible populations are needed through effective vaccination campaigns to address the COVID-19 pandemic in South Asian countries. We aimed to measure the pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in this regard. Research articles published between January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021, were searched through Medline, PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and the WHO COVID-19 database. The Joanna Briggs Institute (2014) tool for prevalence studies was used to assess data quality. We performed a meta-regression test and a sensitive analysis among the studies and used the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model to measure the pooled effect estimates. Subgroup analyses were performed concerning vaccine hesitancy, countries, study population, study level, and the time since the first outbreak of the pandemic. A total of 43 studies out of 598 published articles across the eight countries in South Asia were included. The pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was 26.5% (95% CI [22, 31], I2 = 99.59%). Vaccine hesitancy was higher in Afghanistan (37%), Pakistan (33%), and Bangladesh (28.9%); among the general population (29%); at community levels (27.9%); and the duration of time of 1-12 months since the first outbreak in each country (27.5%). Vaccine hesitancy exists in South Asia with different rates among countries, population sub-groups, communities, studylevels, duration of time since the first outbreak, and study population. Therefore, enhancing public awareness of vaccination and vaccine hesitancy is required to prevent future pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Early in 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic became a global public health concern. College students became dependent on the online environment for learning, but also to receive COVID-19 information. Understanding digital health literacy and subsequent prevention behaviors in a digitally connected population during a public health crisis is crucial to prepare for future pandemics. This study focused on college students in the United States and explored whether digital health literacy predicted their main source of pandemic information, adherence to public health guidelines, and intentions to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. During the summer of 2020, 254 New York State college students completed the survey. Digital health literacy was found to predict using ‘Government agencies websites’ as a main source of information and adherence to public health guidelines. It was not found to predict vaccine intentions. The findings confirm the importance of digital health literacy interventions in younger populations, especially with the rise of health misinformation available on the Internet.

Background: Our aim was to estimate provisional willingness to receive a coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, identify predictive socio-demographic factors, and, principally, determine potential causes in order to guide information provision. Methods: A non-probability online survey was conducted (24th September−17th October 2020) with 5,114 UK adults, quota sampled to match the population for age, gender, ethnicity, income, and region. The Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale assessed intent to take an approved vaccine. Structural equation modelling estimated explanatory factor relationships. Results: 71.7% (n =3,667) were willing to be vaccinated, 16.6% (n =849) were very unsure, and 11.7% (n =598) were strongly hesitant. An excellent model fit (RMSEA=0.05/CFI=0.97/TLI=0.97), explaining 86% of variance in hesitancy, was provided by beliefs about the collective importance, efficacy, side-effects, and speed of development of a COVID-19 vaccine. A second model, with reasonable fit (RMSEA=0.03/CFI=0.93/TLI=0.92), explaining 32% of variance, highlighted two higher-order explanatory factors: 'excessive mistrust' (r =0.51), including conspiracy beliefs, negative views of doctors, and need for chaos, and 'positive healthcare experiences' (r =−0.48), including supportive doctor interactions and good NHS care. Hesitancy was associated with younger age, female gender, lower income, and ethnicity, but socio-demographic information explained little variance (9.8%). Hesitancy was associated with lower adherence to social distancing guidelines. Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is relatively evenly spread across the population. Willingness to take a vaccine is closely bound to recognition of the collective importance. Vaccine public information that highlights prosocial benefits may be especially effective. Factors such as conspiracy beliefs that foster mistrust and erode social cohesion will lower vaccine up-take. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The urgency of the COVID-19 pandemic called upon the joint efforts from the scientific and private sectors to work together to track vaccine acceptance and prevention behaviors.Methods: Our study utilized individual responses to the Delphi Group at Carnegie Mellon University U.S. COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey, in partnership with Facebook. We retrieved survey data from January 2021 to February 2022 (n = 13,426,245) to examine contextual and individual-level predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, vaccination, and mask wearing in the United States. Adjusted logistic regression models were developed to examine individual and ZIP code predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and vaccination status. Given the COVID-19 vaccine was rolled out in phases in the U.S. we conducted analyses stratified by time, January 2021-May 2021 (Time 1) and June 2021-February 2022 (Time 2).Results: In January 2021 only 9% of U.S. Facebook respondents reported receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, and 45% were vaccine hesitant. By February 2022, 80% of U.S. Facebook respondents were vaccinated and only 18% were vaccine hesitant. Individuals who were older, held higher educational degrees, worked in white collar jobs, wore a mask most or all the time, and identified as white and Asian had higher COVID-19 vaccination rates and lower vaccine hesitancy across Time 1 and Time 2. Essential workers and blue-collar occupations had lower COVID vaccinations and higher vaccine hesitancy. By Time 2, all adults were eligible for the COVID-19 vaccine, but blacks and multiracial individuals had lower vaccination and higher vaccine hesitancy compared to whites. Those 55 years and older and females had higher odds of wearing masks most or all the time. Protective service, construction, and installation and repair occupations had lower odds of wearing masks. ZIP Code level percentage of the population with a bachelors' which was associated with mask wearing, higher vaccination, and lower vaccine hesitancy.Conclusion: Associations found in earlier phases of the pandemic were generally found to also be present later in the pandemic, indicating stability in inequities. Additionally, inequities in these important outcomes suggests more work is needed to bridge gaps to ensure that the burden of COVID-19 risk does not disproportionately fall upon subgroups of the population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• COVID-19 vaccine is highly accepted by Abu Dhabi parents. • Children's COVID-19 vaccination acceptance is high among the Abu Dhabi school children's parents. • Important determinants are the age of the children and influential information sources. • Possible hesitancy factors such as parents' higher education need further study. The United Arab Emirates had approved the COVID-19 vaccine for children. Assessing parents' acceptance of the vaccine for their children will influence decision-making in the COVID-19 vaccine roll-out. Parents registered in the Abu Dhabi Department of Education (12,000 families) were invited to complete an online questionnaire from 8th September 2021 to 17th October 2021. Out of the 12,000 families, 2510 (21%) participants answered the survey. The questionnaire investigated the parents' attitudes and beliefs regarding the COVID-19 vaccine. The vaccination rate among this group of respondents was high, with 2255 (89.9%) having received two doses and 1002 (45.5%) having already received a booster dose. Acceptance of the respondents to vaccinate their children was high, (75.1%) said they would vaccinate their children, with 64.4% reporting that they would immediately vaccinate their children if the vaccine were made available. Determinants of COVID-19 child vaccination acceptance included the respondent's vaccination status—i.e., if the respondent is already vaccinated (OR 4.96 [2.89–8.53]) or has taken the third dose (OR 2.37 [1.4–4.01])—their children's age (OR 1.11 [1.30–1.18] for older children), and their trust in the following information sources: the government (OR 2.53 [1.61–3.98]), health care providers (OR 1.98 [1.2–3.24]), or social media (OR 2.17 [1.22–3.88]). Increased level of education had a negative impact on the acceptance of giving the vaccine to children (OR 0.63 [0.52–0.77]); fear of side effects OR 0.000164 (0.000039–0.001) was another determinant. The main factor that encouraged parents to give their children the vaccine was to protect their child's health as reported by 1537 (55.5%) participants. The Abu Dhabi community is highly accepting of the vaccine for their children. Future studies of how this vaccine acceptance can influence the pandemic are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many efficacious COVID-19 vaccines have been approved for general use but their ability to control the disease is being undermined by slow uptake. Resources are needed to persuade people to obtain a COVID-19 vaccine. Here we compare this present study and a previous one to assess the impact of the Cameroon government's policy and efforts to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy after one year of implementation. After obtaining ethical clearance and informed consent, 6732 participants completed a questionnaire about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and acceptance. It was observed that the government's policies and efforts reduced COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy significantly, but this was not enough to ensure the herd immunity necessary to control the disease. The risk factors associated with vaccine hesitancy were the consumption of traditional herbal remedies; living in an urban setting; being female, jobless or a student; working in the education sector; being a politician/policy maker/administrator, engineer or technician; medium income; no education/primary school/secondary/high school/professional training; and working in the informal sector. In contrast, people who were male, healthcare personnel, high-income earners, participants who do not consume traditional herbal remedies, infected or knowing someone who has been infected by COVID-19, and having a chronic illness or comorbidity, were associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Participants also gave several reasons they were either hesitant or willing to take the vaccine. A more rigorous surveillance system is needed to systematically monitor drivers of vaccine hesitancy, establish tailored interventions promoting vaccine acceptance, and evaluate the impact of these interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy can be an obstacle to the global effort to control the current pandemic. The study aimed to test the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Oxford Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale. Design: A methodological and descriptive study. Methods: The research was conducted as a methodological and descriptive study. The sample size consisted of 476 academics who voluntarily agreed to participate in the research and completed the online questionnaire between February and March 2021. Results: As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the fit index values obtained by making two modifications of the one-dimensional Oxford Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale were found to be χ2/df = 1.86; AGFI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.04; GFI = 0.98; CFI = 0.99 and IFI = 0.99. The Cronbach's alpha internal consistency coefficient of the scale was calculated as 0.95. Test-retest reliability coefficient of the scale was r = 0.93 (p < 0.001). Conclusion: It can be concluded that the Oxford Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, adapted to Turkish, is a valid and reliable measurement tool for determining hesitancy of Turkish society towards covid-19 vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the issue of vaccine hesitancy, leading researchers to study the determinants of people's willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. This study is the first to comprehensively investigate the role of preventive practices at both the individual and contextual level, drawing on the theoretical concept of "cultural health capital"., Methods: Utilizing data from the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement (SHARE), covering information from 18,454 individuals aged 50 years and above residing in 25 European countries, we examined the influence of past engagement in preventive practices and the prevalence of such practices within a country on the likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Our analysis included (i) previous vaccination behaviors, (ii) other healthcare-related behaviors, and (iii) lifestyle factors at both the individual and contextual levels. Leveraging the longitudinal design of the SHARE, we accounted for the temporal ordering of the relationships., Results: At the individual level, almost all preventive behaviors were significantly related to people's willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Individuals who (i) had received an influenza vaccination prior to the COVID-19 outbreak and during childhood, (ii) had regularly participated in dental and blood pressure check-ups throughout their lives, and (iii) did not engage in lifestyle-related risk behaviors, were more likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. Notably, alcohol use was not significantly associated. At the contextual level, only the vaccination coverage rate for influenza was found to be robustly related, indicating that individuals were more inclined to receive the COVID-19 vaccine in countries with higher influenza vaccination rates prior to the pandemic., Conclusion: Active participation in preventive practices and effective implementation of vaccination campaigns can contribute to the development of (institutional) cultural health capital, which ultimately promotes a greater willingness to get vaccinated against COVID-19., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Katrijn Delaruelle reports financial support was provided by EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Societal Challenges. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background:  South Africa faced challenges while implementing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) measures such as mass vaccination. Some people rejected or were hesitant to receive government-recommended vaccines. This study explored COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among unvaccinated individuals in a primary care setting in Pretoria, South Africa., Methods:  This was an exploratory phenomenological study that included one-on-one interviews with 12 individuals at Temba Community Health Centre in Pretoria, South Africa., Results:  The research revealed five themes: perceptions of COVID-19 disease, perceptions of COVID-19 vaccine, factors related to non-vaccination, information sources about the COVID-19 vaccine, and long-term vaccination decisions. There were seven linked sub-themes., Conclusion:  Overall, participants had a good understanding of COVID-19 disease, but limited knowledge about the vaccine, causing hesitancy to get vaccinated. Reasons for not getting vaccinated included health-related concerns, safety concerns, personal experiences, and social and political factors. Safety and health-related concerns were prevalent, with adverse vaccine outcomes being the most common concern. Most participants had experienced a historic encounter with a vaccine-related death or illness.Contribution: Vaccine hesitancy should be viewed as a powerful concern from the community, and a key source of worry for the health authorities over any vaccine-related doubt.

This article analyses the organisation of the mass COVID-19 vaccination programme in Poland and its consequences for various aspects of the social identity of healthcare workers (HCWs). Based on 31 in-depth interviews with HCWs, our study reveals the following: (1) Certain elements of the programme (inclusion of other healthcare professionals like pharmacists and laboratory diagnosticians as vaccinators) and the provision of additional infrastructure (pharmacies and shopping malls) may prompt scepticism and criticism in physicians and nurses who feel challenged about their professional autonomy and hierarchies; (2) Given the high levels of professional uncertainty, the implementation of the COVID-19 vaccination is forcing HCWs to revise their attitude to medical standards, resulting in specific responses and adaptation strategies (ranging from the active involvement in the programme due to the sense of mission, to more or less evident scepticism); and (3) Confronting vaccine hesitancy, both among patients and other HCWs, contributes to the feeling of helplessness, leading to criticism of policymakers., (© 2024 The Authors. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Vaccine hesitancy has seen an uprising over the decades, even though there have been many advances regarding vaccine-preventable diseases. Of late, vaccine hesitancy has resurged towards the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has major effects on the human body and has led to the development of different vaccines, which have been shown to provide immunity against the novel coronavirus. Dentists are at an increased risk to COVID-19 because of the nature of their work. It is imperative to have high vaccination coverage for this group. Aim: The aim of this study is to determine vaccine hesitancy and drivers associated with vaccine hesitancy among dental students at a university in South Africa. Setting: A dental school in South Africa was chosen as the setting for this study. Methods: An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted by means of an anonymous, online, validated questionnaire to determine vaccine hesitancy. Results: Of the 205 dental students participated, 83.9% (n = 172) students were vaccine not hesitant. The main concerns regarding the vaccines were identified as safety and efficacy of the vaccine. Pressure by family or friends and the university to get vaccinated was evident. Conclusions: Vaccine hesitancy is high despite mandatory vaccination policies in South Africa. Specific drivers contributing to vaccine hesitancy were identified as doubt in the efficacy and safety of the vaccine. Contribution: This study has highlighted the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy among dental students at University of the Western Cape, prior to compulsory vacccination implementations.

This study examined the way attitudes towards science in the U.S. mediate the relationship between COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and psychosocial predictors, such as political ideology, religiosity, reactance proneness, dogmatism, perceived communal ostracism, education, and socioeconomic status. We analyzed the structure of people’s attitudes towards science, revealing four distinct factors: epistemic confidence, belief that science and technology are beneficial, trust in science in general, and trust in medical science. With all four factors included as mediators in a saturated path analysis, low levels of trust in medical science and low epistemic confidence fully mediated the relationships between nearly all of the psychosocial predictors and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Political conservativism’s negative association with vaccine hesitancy was partially mediated by the same two facets of people’s attitudes towards science. Adding nuance to existing research, we found that trust in science in general was not a significant mediator once all four facets were included in the model. These findings are discussed with a focus on their implications for understanding attitudes towards science and their substantial and complex role in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Background: Large-scale health communication challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as widespread misinformation and distrust in health care professionals, have influenced reluctance to take the COVID-19 vaccine, also known as vaccine hesitancy. Trust in health professionals, adequate health literacy, and high self-efficacy are key components of actively pursuing preventative and protective health care measures. These factors may be associated with intentions to seek and complete a COVID-19 vaccine dosing. Objective: The objective of this analysis was to identify factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Methods: In February 2021, US adults (N=5872) responded to a web-based survey on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and components of health communication (trust in sources of health information, health literacy, and self-efficacy). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to explore associations between these factors and vaccine hesitancy while adjusting for key demographics. We hypothesized that low levels of trust, health literacy, and self-efficacy would be associated with increased vaccine hesitancy. Results: The adjusted odds of vaccine hesitancy was greater among those who placed little to no trust in health professionals compared to those who held a lot of trust (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 8.54, 95% CI 6.52-11.19). The odds of vaccine hesitancy was also greater among those who felt frustrated about finding health information compared to those who did not (AOR 2.10, 95% CI 1.62-2.70). Participants who had little to no confidence in receiving health advice or information had greater odds of vaccine hesitancy compared to those who had a lot of confidence (AOR 3.05, 95% CI 2.34-3.97). Conclusions: This study underscores the importance of trust between health professionals and their patients, and a need for improving health literacy regarding vaccines. Perceptions of mistrust and low levels of health literacy were associated with high levels of vaccine hesitancy, providing empirical support of framing these factors as perceived barriers to vaccine uptake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted racial and ethnic minority communities, particularly African American and Latino communities. The impacts of social determinants of health, structural racism, misinformation, and mistrust have contributed to a decreased COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Effective methods of addressing and combatting these barriers are essential. Accurate and targeted messaging delivered by trusted voices from community-based organizations, government health systems and organizations, and healthcare and academic systems is imperative. Outreach and communication should be culturally sensitive, provided in the preferred language of the community, flexible, and tailored for in-person and virtual outlets. This communication must also increase trust, combat misinformation, and inspire COVID-19 vaccine confidence. In this manuscript, we outline a framework for inspiring COVID-19 vaccine confidence in African American and Latino communities. These methods of targeted outreach should be considered and implemented for urgent and nonurgent community public health efforts beyond the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., monkeypox) and as a framework to inspire vaccine confidence in those living in racial and ethnic minority communities globally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Herd immunity for COVID-19 is the ultimate goal to end the pandemic. Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has been a subject of considerable debate regarding vaccines effectiveness. This ongoing discussion and other evolving variables contribute to the hesitancy toward vaccines and levels of vaccination acceptance among both the healthcare workers and the public. This study was conducted to assess COVID-19 vaccine uptake and hesitancy among the Saudi Arabian population during the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant. A national cross-sectional survey conducted between June 28 and July 5, 2021. The survey collected sociodemographic information, personal and family history of previous COVID-19 infection, adherence to precautionary measures, COVID-19 vaccination status, parental willingness to vaccinate their teenage children, and address variable associated with hesitancy to receive vaccination. Among the 4071 participants, 67 % were women, 86 % of the participants received COVID-19 vaccine, 70 % had very high or high commitment with COVID-19 precautionary measures. On multivariate analysis, vaccine hesitancy was less likely in men (OR 0.652, p-value < 0.001), those who had direct family members infected with COVID-19 (OR 0.455, p-value < 0.001), and those who reported using the Ministry of Health official channels as information sources (OR 0.522, p-value < 0.001), while those younger than 44 years had higher hesitancy to receive the vaccine (1.5–2.1 times). Of the participants, only 42 % showed willingness to vaccinate their teenage (12–18 years old) children. The participants in this study had high COVID-19 vaccination rate; however, hesitancy was reported more commonly among women. Their willingness to vaccinate their teenage children was much lower. Participants relying on social media platforms were highly hesitant to receive vaccination. Public health officials should scale up their efforts targeting females, young population, and parents by vaccination awareness campaigns, and refute misinformation spread on social media, especially with the emergence of variants and the news burst that coincide with them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scant research exists on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among law enforcement officers, hindering health messaging development for officers and, by extension, the communities they serve. This paper’s goal was to address this gap by providing the necessary data to better under hesitancy to guide training and policy interventions for officers. The objective was to conduct the first nationally representative survey of officers on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its correlates. We collected data from February 2021 to March 2022 on officer COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and examined their responses in terms of sociodemographic factors, health status, and job characteristics. We found that 40% of officers were COVID-19 vaccine hesitant. We found that officers with higher education, older officers, officers with more law enforcement experience, officers who received recent health checkups, and commanders (compared to line officers) were less likely to be COVID-19 vaccine hesitant. Critically, officers working in law enforcement agencies that provided masks for COVID-19 protection were less likely to be COVID-19 vaccine hesitant (compared to agencies not providing masks). Ongoing research is needed to understand how evolving attitudes and barriers toward vaccination change over time for officers and to test messaging to better align officers with health guidelines.