Louis ME, Brewer NT, Singleton JA. The Association of Reported Experiences of Racial and Ethnic Discrimination in Health Care with COVID-19 Vaccination Status and Intent - United States, April 22, 2021-November 26, 2022

In 2021, the CDC Director declared that racism is a serious threat to public health,* reflecting a growing awareness of racism as a cause of health inequities, health disparities, and disease. Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19-related hospitalization and death (1,2) illustrate the need to examine root causes, including experiences of discrimination. This report describes the association between reported experiences of discrimination in U.S. health care settings and COVID-19 vaccination status and intent to be vaccinated by race and ethnicity during April 22, 2021-November 26, 2022, based on the analysis of interview data collected from 1,154,347 respondents to the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM). Overall, 3.5% of adults aged ≥18 years reported having worse health care experiences compared with persons of other races and ethnicities (i.e., they experienced discrimination), with significantly higher percentages reported by persons who identified as non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) (10.7%), non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) (7.2%), non-Hispanic multiple or other race (multiple or other race) (6.7%), Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) (4.5%), non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (NHOPI) (3.9%), and non-Hispanic Asian (Asian) (2.8%) than by non-Hispanic White (White) persons (1.6%). Unadjusted differences in prevalence of being unvaccinated against COVID-19 among respondents reporting worse health care experiences than persons of other races and ethnicities compared with those who reported that their health care experiences were the same as those of persons of other races and ethnicities were statistically significant overall (5.3) and for NHOPI (19.2), White (10.5), multiple or other race (5.7), Black (4.6), Asian (4.3), and Hispanic (2.6) adults. Findings were similar for vaccination intent. Eliminating inequitable experiences in health care settings might help reduce some disparities in receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine.

Expanding the analysis of mechanisms of action in behavioral interventions: cognitive change versus cognitive activation

OBJECTIVE

To understand the mechanisms of action underlying behavioral interventions, researchers typically examine whether the treatment changes cognitions and whether changes in cognition predict behavior (cognitive change). This current research explores an alternative mechanism whereby the intervention increases the impact of pre-existing cognitions on behavior (cognitive activation). We tested whether cognitive change or cognitive activation explains the impact of cigarette pack messages on smoking restraint.

DESIGN

The research comprised a validation experiment (N = 135) and a 4-week RCT (N = 719) with smokers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

At both baseline and follow-up of the RCT, smokers self-reported threat appraisals, coping appraisals, and smoking restraint.

RESULTS

Intervention messages heightened the accessibility of threat appraisals compared to control messages (validation experiment). In the RCT, smoking restraint increased among intervention participants but not controls. Trial arm showed no corresponding change in threat or coping appraisals. However, trial arm interacted with baseline health cognitions such that synergies between threat appraisal components, and between threat appraisals and coping appraisals, predicted smoking restraint for intervention participants but not for controls.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support a cognitive activation process whereby health messages on cigarette packs increase the impact of pre-existing threat appraisals on smoking restraint.

A qualitative study of behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake among unvaccinated Americans in the US April-May 2021

INTRODUCTION

Around one-third of Americans reported they were unwilling to get a COVID-19 vaccine in April 2021. This focus group study aimed to provide insights on the factors contributing to unvaccinated adults' hesitancy or refusal to get vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines.

METHOD

Ipsos recruited 59 unvaccinated US adults who were vaccine hesitant (i.e., conflicted about or opposed to receiving a COVID-19 vaccination) using the Ipsos KnowledgePanel. Trained facilitators led a total of 10 focus groups via video-conference in March and April 2021. Two coders manually coded the data from each group using a coding frame based on the focus group discussion guide. The coding team collaborated in analyzing the data for key themes.

RESULTS

Data analysis of transcripts from the focus groups illuminated four main themes associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: lack of trust in experts and institutions; concern about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines; resistance towards prescriptive guidance and restrictions; and, despite personal reluctance or unwillingness to get vaccinated, acceptance of others getting vaccinated.

DISCUSSION

Vaccine confidence communication strategies should address individual concerns, describe the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination, and highlight evolving science using factural and neutral presentations of information to foster trust.

Recommending COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents in primary care

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccines are available for adolescents in the United States, but many parents are hesitant to have their children vaccinated. The advice of primary care professionals strongly influences vaccine uptake.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the willingness of primary care professionals (PCPs) to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents.

METHODS

Participants were a national sample of 1,047 US adolescent primary care professionals. They participated in an online survey in early 2021, after a COVID-19 vaccine had been approved for adults but before approval for adolescents. Respondents included physicians (71%), advanced practice providers (17%), and nurses (12%). We identified correlates of willingness to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents using logistic regression.

RESULTS

The majority (89%) of respondents were willing to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents, with advanced practice providers and nurses being less likely than paediatricians to recommend vaccination (84% vs. 94%, aOR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23-0.92). Respondents who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine were more likely to recommend adolescent vaccination (92% vs. 69%, aOR 4.20, 95% CI 2.56-6.87) as were those with more years in practice (94% vs. 88%, aOR 2.93, 95% CI 1.79-4.99). Most respondents (96%) said they would need some measure of support in order to provide COVID-19 vaccination to adolescents, with vaccine safety and efficacy information being the most commonly cited need (80%).

CONCLUSION

Adolescent primary care professionals were generally willing to recommend COVID-19 vaccination. However, most indicated a need for additional resources to be able to administer COVID-19 vaccines at their clinic.

The Impact of The Real Cost Vaping and Smoking Ads across Tobacco Products

INTRODUCTION

Little research has examined the spillover effects of tobacco communication campaigns, such as how anti-smoking ads affect vaping.

AIMS AND METHODS

Participants were a national sample of 623 U.S. adolescents (ages 13-17 years) from a probability-based panel. In a between-subjects experiment, we randomly assigned adolescents to view one of four videos online: (1) a smoking prevention video ad from the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) The Real Cost campaign, (2) a neutral control video about smoking, (3) a vaping prevention video ad from The Real Cost campaign, or (4) a neutral control video about vaping. We present effect sizes as Cohen's d, standardized mean differences, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Exposure to The Real Cost vaping prevention ads led to more negative attitudes toward vaping compared with control (d = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.07, 0.53), while exposure to The Real Cost smoking prevention ads did not affect smoking-related outcomes compared with control (p-values > .05). Turning to spillover effects, exposure to The Real Cost smoking prevention ads led to less susceptibility to vaping (d = -0.34, 95% CI: -0.56, -0.12), more negative attitudes toward vaping (d = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.65) and higher perceived likelihood of harm from vaping (d = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.48), compared with control. Exposure to The Real Cost vaping prevention ads did not affect smoking-related outcomes compared with control (p-values > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This experiment found evidence of beneficial spillover effects of smoking prevention ads on vaping outcomes and found no detrimental effects of vaping prevention ads on smoking outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS

Little research has examined the spillover effects of tobacco communication campaigns, such as how anti-smoking ads affect vaping. Using a national sample of 623 U.S. adolescents, we found beneficial evidence of spillover effects of smoking prevention ads on vaping outcomes, which is promising since it suggests that smoking prevention campaigns may have the additional benefit of reducing both smoking and vaping among adolescents. Additionally, we found that vaping prevention campaigns did not elicit unintended consequences on smoking-related outcomes, an important finding given concerns that vaping prevention campaigns could drive youth to increase or switch to using combustible cigarettes instead of vaping.

Behavioral and Social Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccination in the United States, August-November 2021

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and widely available, but many adults in the U.S. have not been vaccinated for COVID-19. This study examined the associations between behavioral and social drivers of vaccination with COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the U.S. adults and their prevalence by region.

METHODS

A nationally representative sample of U.S. adults participated in a cross-sectional telephone survey in August-November 2021; the analysis was conducted in January 2022. Survey questions assessed self-reported COVID-19 vaccine initiation, demographics, and behavioral and social drivers of vaccination.

RESULTS

Among the 255,763 respondents, 76% received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccine uptake was higher among respondents aged ≥75 years (94%), females (78%), and Asian non-Hispanic people (94%). The drivers of vaccination most strongly associated with uptake included higher anticipated regret from nonvaccination, risk perception, and confidence in vaccine safety and importance, followed by work- or school-related vaccination requirements, social norms, and provider recommendation (all p<0.05). The direction of association with uptake varied by reported level of difficulty in accessing vaccines. The prevalence of all of these behavioral and social drivers of vaccination was highest in the Northeast region and lowest in the Midwest and South.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationally representative survey found that COVID-19 vaccine uptake was most strongly associated with greater anticipated regret, risk perception, and confidence in vaccine safety and importance, followed by vaccination requirements and social norms. Interventions that leverage these social and behavioral drivers of vaccination have the potential to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and could be considered for other vaccine introductions.

Explaining demographic differences in COVID-19 vaccination stage in the United States - April-May 2021

COVID-19 vaccine coverage in the US has marked demographic and geographical disparities, but few explanations exist for them. Our paper aimed to identify behavioral and social drivers that explain these vaccination disparities. Participants were a national probability sample of 3562 American adults, recruited from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel. Participants completed an online survey in spring 2021, when COVD-19 vaccination was available for higher-risk groups but not yet available to all US adults. The survey assessed COVID-19 vaccination stage (intentions and vaccine uptake), constructs from the Increasing Vaccination Model (IVM) domains (thinking and feeling, social processes, and direct behavior change), self-reported exposure to COVID-19 vaccine information, and demographic characteristics. Analyses used multiple imputation to address item nonresponse and linear regressions to conduct mediation analyses. Higher COVID-19 vaccination stage was strongly associated with older age, liberal political ideology, and higher income in adjusted analyses (all p < .001). Vaccination stage was more modestly associated with urbanicity, white race, and Hispanic ethnicity (all p < .05). Some key mediators that explained more than one-third of demographic differences in vaccination stage were perceived vaccine effectiveness, social norms, and recommendations from family and friends across most demographic characteristics (all p < .05). Other mediators included safety concerns, trust, altruism, provider recommendation, and information seeking. Access to vaccination, barriers to vaccination, and self-efficacy explained few demographic differences. One of the most reliable explanations for demographic differences in COVID-19 vaccination stage is social processes, including social norms, recommendations, and altruism. Interventions to promote COVID-19 vaccination should address social processes and other domains in the IVM.

Recruitment strategies and HPV self-collection return rates for under-screened women for cervical cancer prevention

In the United States, medically underserved women carry a heavier burden of cancer incidence and mortality, yet are largely underrepresented in cancer prevention studies. My Body, My Test is a n observational cohort, multi-phase cervical cancer prevention study in North Carolina that recruited low-income women, aged 30-65 years and who had not undergone Pap testing in ≥ 4 years. Participants were offered home-based self-collection of cervico-vaginal samples for primary HPV testing. Here, we aimed to describe the recruitment strategies utilized by study staff, and the resulting recruitment and self-collection kit return rates for each specific recruitment strategy. Participants were recruited through different approaches: either direct (active, staff-effort intensive) or indirect (passive on the part of study staff). Of a total of 1,475 individuals screened for eligibility, 695 were eligible (47.1%) and 487 (70% of eligible) participants returned their self-collection kit. Small media recruitment resulted in the highest number of individuals found to be study eligible, with a relatively high self-collection kit return of 70%. In-clinic in-reach resulted in a lower number of study-eligible women, yet had the highest kit return rate (90%) among those sent kits. In contrast, 211 recruitment which resulted in the lowest kit return of 54%. Small media, word of mouth, and face-to-face outreach resulted in self-collection kit return rates ranging from 72 to 79%. The recruitment strategies undertaken by study staff support the continued study of reaching under-screened populations into cervical cancer prevention studies.

Characteristics of the Moveable Middle: Opportunities Among Adults Open to COVID-19 Vaccination

INTRODUCTION

Focusing on subpopulations that express the intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccination but are unvaccinated may improve the yield of COVID-19 vaccination efforts.

METHODS

A nationally representative sample of 789,658 U.S. adults aged ≥18 years participated in the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module from May 2021 to April 2022. The survey assessed respondents' COVID-19 vaccination status and intent by demographic characteristics (age, urbanicity, educational attainment, region, insurance, income, and race/ethnicity). This study compared composition and within-group estimates of those who responded that they definitely or probably will get vaccinated or are unsure (moveable middle) from the first and last month of data collection.

RESULTS

Because vaccination uptake increased over the study period, the moveable middle declined among persons aged ≥18 years. Adults aged 18-39 years and suburban residents comprised most of the moveable middle in April 2022. Groups with the largest moveable middles in April 2022 included persons with no insurance (10%), those aged 18-29 years (8%), and those with incomes below poverty (8%), followed by non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (7%), non-Hispanic multiple or other race (6%), non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native persons (6%), non-Hispanic Black or African American persons (6%), those with below high school education (6%), those with high school education (5%), and those aged 30-39 years (5%).

CONCLUSIONS

A sizable percentage of adults open to receiving COVID-19 vaccination remain in several demographic groups. Emphasizing engagement of persons who are unvaccinated in some racial/ethnic groups, aged 18-39 years, without health insurance, or with lower income may reach more persons open to vaccination.

Drivers of COVID-19 policy stringency in 175 countries and territories: COVID-19 cases and deaths, gross domestic products per capita, and health expenditures

Background

New data on COVID-19 may influence the stringency of containment policies, but these potential effect are not understood. We aimed to understand the associations of new COVID-19 cases and deaths with policy stringency globally and regionally.

Methods

We modelled the marginal effects of new COVID-19 cases and deaths on policy stringency (scored 0-100) in 175 countries and territories, adjusting for gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and health expenditure (% of GDP), and public expenditure on health. The time periods examined were March to August 2020, September 2020 to February 2021, and March to August 2021.

Results

Policy response to new cases and deaths was faster and more stringent early in the COVID-19 pandemic (March to August 2020) compared to subsequent periods. New deaths were more strongly associated with stringent policies than new cases. In an average week, one new death per 100 000 people was associated with a stringency increase of 2.1 units in the March to August 2020 period, 1.3 units in the September 2020 to February 2021 period, and 0.7 units in the March to August 2021 period. New deaths in Africa and the Western Pacific were associated with more stringency than in other regions. Higher health expenditure as a percentage of GDP was associated with less stringent policies. Similarly, higher public expenditure on health by governments was mostly associated with less stringency across all three periods. GDP per capita did not have consistent patterns of associations with stringency.

Conclusions

The stringency of COVID-19 policies was more strongly associated with new deaths than new cases. Our findings demonstrate the need for enhanced mortality surveillance to ensure policy alignment during health emergencies. Countries that invest less in health or have a lower public expenditure on health may be inclined to enact more stringent policies. This new empirical understanding of COVID-19 policy drivers can help public health officials anticipate and shape policy responses in future health emergencies.

Human papillomavirus vaccination and cervical cancer risk

Persistent human papillomavirus infection is the central cause of cervical cancer, the leading cause of cancer death among women worldwide. Clear evidence from both randomized trials and population based studies shows that vaccination against human papillomavirus reduces the incidence of cervical pre-cancer. These data suggest that the vaccine reduces the incidence of cervical cancer. However, human papillomavirus vaccine coverage is inadequate in all countries, especially in low and middle income countries where disease burden is highest. Supply side strategies to improve coverage include increasing the availability of low cost vaccines, school located delivery, single dose vaccine schedules, and development of vaccines that do not need refrigeration. Demand side strategies include enhancing provider recommendations, correcting misinformation, and public awareness campaigns. The near elimination of cervical cancer is achievable through increased uptake of human papillomavirus vaccination and efforts to increase screening for cervical cancer, especially when enacted to reduce disparities in across the world.

Employer requirements and COVID-19 vaccination and attitudes among healthcare personnel in the U.S.: Findings from National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module, August - September 2021

INTRODUCTION

Employer vaccination requirements have been used to increase vaccination uptake among healthcare personnel (HCP). In summer 2021, HCP were the group most likely to have employer requirements for COVID-19 vaccinations as healthcare facilities led the implementation of such requirements. This study examined the association between employer requirements and HCP's COVID-19 vaccination status and attitudes about the vaccine.

METHODS

Participants were a national representative sample of United States (US) adults who completed the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM) during August-September 2021. Respondents were asked about COVID-19 vaccination and intent, requirements for vaccination, place of work, attitudes surrounding vaccinations, and sociodemographic variables. This analysis focused on HCP respondents. We first calculated the weighted proportion reporting COVID-19 vaccination for HCP by sociodemographic variables. Then we computed unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios for vaccination coverage and key indicators on vaccine attitudes, comparing HCP based on individual self-report of vaccination requirements.

RESULTS

Of 12,875 HCP respondents, 41.5% reported COVID-19 vaccination employer requirements. Among HCP with vaccination requirements, 90.5% had been vaccinated against COVID-19, as compared to 73.3% of HCP without vaccination requirements-a pattern consistent across sociodemographic groups. Notably, the greatest differences in uptake between HCP with and without employee requirements were seen in sociodemographic subgroups with the lowest vaccination uptake, e.g., HCP aged 18-29 years, HCP with high school or less education, HCP living below poverty, and uninsured HCP. In every sociodemographic subgroup examined, vaccine uptake was more equitable among HCP with vaccination requirements than in HCP without. Finally, HCP with vaccination requirements were also more likely to express confidence in the vaccine's safety (68.3% vs. 60.1%) and importance (89.6% vs 79.6%).

CONCLUSION

In a large national US sample, employer requirements were associated with higher and more equitable HCP vaccination uptake across all sociodemographic groups examined. Our findings suggest that employer requirements can contribute to improving COVID-19 vaccination coverage, similar to patterns seen for other vaccines.

Patient perspectives on cervical cancer screening interventions among underscreened women

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer is highly preventable with regular screening, yet over 4,000 women die from it annually in the United States. Over half of new cervical cancer cases in the U.S. are attributable to insufficient screening.

METHODS

Participants were 23 low-income, uninsured or Medicaid-insured women in North Carolina who were overdue for cervical cancer screening according to national guidelines. Semi-structured interviews examined perspectives on barriers to cervical cancer screening and on interventions to reduce these barriers. We also elicited feedback on three proposed evidence-based interventions: one-on-one education, coupons to reduce out-of-pocket costs, and self-collection of samples for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, the primary cause of cervical cancer.

RESULTS

Reported barriers included high cost, inconvenient clinic hours, lack of provider recommendation, poor transportation, difficulty finding a provider, fear of pain, and low perceived need. Participants suggested interventions including reducing cost, improving convenience through community-based screening or extended clinic hours, strengthening provider recommendations, and providing one-on-one counseling and education outreach. HPV self-collection was most frequently selected as the "most helpful" of 3 proposed interventions (n = 11), followed by reducing out-of-pocket costs (n = 7) and one-on-one education (n = 5).

CONCLUSION

Cost was the most reported barrier to cervical cancer screening, although women experience multiple simultaneous barriers. Novel interventions such as HPV self-collection promise to reduce some, but not all, barriers to primary screening. Interventions that work on reducing multiple barriers, including obstacles to receiving follow-up care, may be most effective to prevent cervical cancer among these high-risk women.

Geographic Heterogeneity in Behavioral and Social Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccination

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about how the drivers of COVID-19 vaccination vary across the U.S. To inform vaccination outreach efforts, this study explores geographic variation in correlates of COVID-19 nonvaccination among adults.

METHODS

Participants were a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults identified through random-digit dialing for the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module. Analyses examined the geographic and temporal landscape of constructs in the Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination Framework among unvaccinated respondents from May 2021 to December 2021 (n=531,798) and sociodemographic and geographic disparities and Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination predictors of COVID-19 nonvaccination from October 2021 to December 2021 (n=187,756).

RESULTS

National coverage with at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine was 79.3% by December 2021, with substantial geographic heterogeneity. Regions with the largest proportion of unvaccinated persons who would probably get a COVID-19 vaccine or were unsure resided in the Southeast and Midwest (Health and Human Services Regions 4 and 5). Both regions had similar temporal trends regarding concerns about COVID-19 and confidence in vaccine importance, although the Southeast had especially low confidence in vaccine safety in December 2021, lowest in Florida (5.5%) and highest in North Carolina (18.0%). The strongest Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination correlate of not receiving a COVID-19 vaccination was lower confidence in COVID-19 vaccine importance (adjusted prevalence ratio=5.19, 95% CI=4.93, 5.47; strongest in the Northeast, Southwest, and Mountain West and weakest in the Southeast and Midwest). Other Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination correlates also varied by region.

CONCLUSIONS

Contributors to nonvaccination showed substantial geographic heterogeneity. Strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccination uptake may need to be tailored regionally.

Vaccination barriers and drivers in Romania: a focused ethnographic study

BACKGROUND

In 2016-18, a large measles outbreak occurred in Romania identified by pockets of sub-optimally vaccinated population groups in the country. The aim of the current study was to gain insight into barriers and drivers from the experience of measles vaccination from the perspectives of caregivers and their providers.

METHODS

Data were collected by non-participant observation of vaccination consultations and individual interviews with health workers and caregivers in eight Romanian clinics with high or low measles vaccination uptake. Romanian stakeholders were involved in all steps of the study. The findings of this study were discussed during a workshop with key stakeholders.

RESULTS

Over 400 h of observation and 161 interviews were conducted. A clear difference was found between clinics with high and low measles vaccination uptake which indicates that being aware of and following recommended practices for both vaccination service delivery and conveying vaccine recommendations to caregivers may have an impact on vaccine uptake. Barriers identified were related to shortcomings in following recommended practices for vaccination consultations by health workers (e.g. correctly assessing contraindications or providing enough information to allow an informed decision). These observations were largely confirmed in interviews with caregivers and revealed significant knowledge gaps.

CONCLUSIONS

The identification of key barriers provided an opportunity to design specific interventions to improve vaccination service delivery (e.g. mobile vaccination clinics, use of an electronic vaccination registry system for scheduling of appointments) and build capacity among health workers (e.g. guidance and supporting materials and training programmes).

Crowdsourcing interventions to promote uptake of COVID-19 booster vaccines

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 booster vaccine uptake rates are behind the rate of primary vaccination in many countries. Governments and non-governmental institutions rely on a range of interventions aiming to increase booster uptake. Yet, little is known how experts and the general public evaluate these interventions.

METHODS

We applied a novel crowdsourcing approach to provide rapid insights on the most promising interventions to promote uptake of COVID-19 booster vaccines. In the first phase (December 2021), international experts (n = 78 from 17 countries) proposed 46 unique interventions. To reduce noise and potential bias, in the second phase (January 2022), experts (n = 307 from 34 countries) and representative general population samples from the UK (n = 299) and the US (n = 300) rated the proposed interventions on several evaluation criteria, including effectiveness and acceptability, on a 5-point Likert-type scale.

FINDINGS

Sanctions were evaluated as potentially most effective but least accepted. Evaluations by expert and general population samples were considerably aligned. Interventions that received the most positive evaluations regarding both effectiveness and acceptability across evaluation groups were: a day off work after getting vaccinated, financial incentives, tax benefits, promotional campaigns, and mobile vaccination teams.

INTERPRETATION

The results provide useful insights to help governmental and non-governmental institutions in their decisions about which interventions to implement. Additionally, the applied crowdsourcing method may be used in future studies to retrieve rapid insights on the comparative evaluation of (health) policies.

FUNDING

This study received funding from the Austrian Science Fund (SFB F63) and the University of Vienna.

Adolescents' Understanding of Smoking and Vaping Risk Language: Cognitive Interviews to Inform Scale Development

INTRODUCTION

Perceived message effectiveness (PME) is a common metric to understand receptivity to tobacco prevention messages, yet most measures have been developed with adults. We examined adolescents' interpretation of language within candidate items for a new youth-targeted PME measure using cognitive interviewing. We sought to understand the meaning adolescents assigned to our candidate PME items to improve item wording.

AIMS AND METHODS

Participants were 20 adolescents, ages 13-17 years from the United States. Cognitive interviews used a structured guide to elicit feedback on comprehension, answer retrieval, and language regarding a set of Reasoned Action Approach-based survey items that assessed the PME of smoking and vaping prevention ads. We employed thematic analysis to synthesize findings from the interviews.

RESULTS

Interviews identified three main issues related to survey items: ambiguity of language, word choice (risk and other terminology), and survey item phrasing. Adolescents preferred direct, definitive language over more ambiguous phrasing which they saw as less serious (eg, "will" instead of "could"). For risk terminology, they preferred terms such as "harmful" and "dangerous" over "risky," which was viewed as easy to discount. The term "negative effects" was interpreted as encompassing a broader set of tobacco harms than "health effects." Adolescents said that the term "vape" was preferable to "e-cigarette," and identified ways to simplify item wording for greater clarity.

CONCLUSIONS

Tobacco risk terms that appear similar differ in meaning to adolescents, and more direct and unambiguous language is preferred. Our findings informed changes to the PME scale items to improve clarity and reduce measurement error.

IMPLICATIONS

This study adds to the literature on how adolescents interpret tobacco prevention language. Adolescents may interpret terminology differently than adults, which could lead to ambiguity in meaning and thus measurement error. Through cognitive interviewing, we identified and improved the language in a youth-focused PME measure for tobacco and vaping prevention.

β-Delayed One and Two Neutron Emission Probabilities Southeast of ^{132}Sn and the Odd-Even Systematics in r-Process Nuclide Abundances

The β-delayed one- and two-neutron emission probabilities (P_{1n} and P_{2n}) of 20 neutron-rich nuclei with N≥82 have been measured at the RIBF facility of the RIKEN Nishina Center. P_{1n} of ^{130,131}Ag, ^{133,134}Cd, ^{135,136}In, and ^{138,139}Sn were determined for the first time, and stringent upper limits were placed on P_{2n} for nearly all cases. β-delayed two-neutron emission (β2n) was unambiguously identified in ^{133}Cd and ^{135,136}In, and their P_{2n} were measured. Weak β2n was also detected from ^{137,138}Sn. Our results highlight the effect of the N=82 and Z=50 shell closures on β-delayed neutron emission probability and provide stringent benchmarks for newly developed macroscopic-microscopic and self-consistent global models with the inclusion of a statistical treatment of neutron and γ emission. The impact of our measurements on r-process nucleosynthesis was studied in a neutron star merger scenario. Our P_{1n} and P_{2n} have a direct impact on the odd-even staggering of the final abundance, improving the agreement between calculated and observed Solar System abundances. The odd isotope fraction of Ba in r-process-enhanced (r-II) stars is also better reproduced using our new data.

Impact of Vaping Prevention Advertisements on US Adolescents: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Understanding whether prevention advertisements reduce susceptibility to vaping is important owing to concerning levels of adolescent vaping.

Objective

To examine whether vaping prevention advertisements from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) national Real Cost campaign lead to lower susceptibility to vaping among adolescents.

Design, Setting, and Participants

For this 3-group randomized clinical trial with parallel assignment, participants were US adolescents aged 13 to 17 years who were susceptible to vaping or current e-cigarette users, recruited from online panels. Adolescents were randomized to 1 of 2 Real Cost vaping prevention trial groups (health harms- or addiction-themed advertisements) or to a control group (investigator-created neutral videos about vaping). Adolescents completed 4 weekly online surveys at visits 1 to 4 over a 3-week period. Data were analyzed from December 1, 2021, to August 25, 2022.

Interventions

Adolescents saw 3 randomly ordered 30-second video advertisements online at each of 3 weekly study visits (visits 1, 2, and 3).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary trial outcome was susceptibility to vaping. Surveys also assessed susceptibility to smoking cigarettes to examine any spillover effects of vaping prevention advertisements on smoking outcomes. Both susceptibility measures had 3 items and ranged from 1 (indicating not susceptible) to 4 (indicating highly susceptible). The primary analyses compared Real Cost groups (combined) with the control group, while exploratory analyses compared the Real Cost groups with each other.

Results

Participants were 1514 adolescents (1140 [75.3%] boys; mean [SD] age, 15.22 [1.18] years), including 504 randomized to the Real Cost health harms group, 506 randomized to the Real Cost addiction group, and 504 randomized to the control group. Adolescents in the Real Cost groups (combined) had lower susceptibility to vaping at visit 4 than those in the control group (b = -0.21; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.10). The Real Cost groups did not differ from one another on susceptibility to vaping (visit 4: b = -0.05; 95% CI, -0.17 to 0.07). Adolescents in the Real Cost groups (combined) also had lower susceptibility to smoking cigarettes than those in the control group (b = -0.21; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.10). For both vaping and smoking, Real Cost groups had less positive attitudes (vaping: b = -0.27; 95% CI, -0.40 to -0.14; smoking: b = -0.23; 95% CI, -0.39 to -0.08) compared with the control group.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that vaping prevention advertisements from the FDA Real Cost campaign led to lower adolescent susceptibility to vaping and had beneficial spillover effects on cigarette smoking outcomes. Tobacco prevention campaigns can help reduce youth tobacco use.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04836455.

Is a cigarette brand with fewer chemicals safer? Public perceptions in two national US experiments

By law, the US government must publicly display the quantities of harmful chemicals in cigarettes by brand, but doing so could mislead people to incorrectly think that some cigarettes are safer than others. We evaluated formats for presenting chemical quantities side-by-side to see if any were misleading. We recruited US convenience (n = 604) and probability (n = 1440) samples. We randomized participants to 1 of 5 formats: checklist, point estimates, ranges, a visual risk indicator, or no-quantity control. Participants were far more likely to incorrectly endorse one cigarette brand as riskier than the other in the checklist (65% made error), point estimate (67-70%), range (64-67%), or risk indicator (68-75%) conditions as compared to the no-quantity control (1%, all p < .001). Among smokers, erroneous risk perceptions mediated the impact of quantity format on interest in switching brands. People viewing chemical quantities for cigarette brands side-by-side misperceived differences in risk, suggesting limited public health value of this information.

Identifying Promising Themes for Adolescent Vaping Warnings: A National Experiment

INTRODUCTION

Adolescent vaping remains a problem in the United States, yet little is known about what health warning themes most discourage vaping among adolescents. We sought to identify the most compelling themes for vaping warnings for US adolescents.

METHODS

Participants were a national probability sample of 623 US adolescents aged 13-17 years, recruited in the summer of 2020. Adolescents were randomized to one of the five warning message themes about the potential health effects of vaping: 1. chemical harms, 2. lung harms, 3. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) harms, 4. nicotine addiction, or 5. control (messages about vape litter). The primary outcome was perceived message effectiveness (PME; 3-item scale). Secondary outcomes were negative affect (fear), attention, anticipated social interactions, and message novelty.

RESULTS

Adolescents rated the chemical, lung, and COVID-19 harms warning messages higher on PME than nicotine addiction and control (all p < .05), while nicotine addiction was rated higher than control (p < .05). The chemical, lung, and COVID-19 harms warning themes also elicited greater negative affect than nicotine addiction and control (all p < .05). For all other secondary outcomes, the COVID-19 harms warning message theme was rated higher than nicotine addiction and control (all p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Adolescents perceived warning message themes about lung, chemical and COVID-19 health effects of vaping as more effective than nicotine addiction. To discourage vaping, the FDA and others should communicate to youth about the health effects of vaping beyond nicotine addiction.

IMPLICATIONS

Adolescents rated warning message themes about the lung, chemical, and COVID-19 health effects of vaping as more effective than nicotine addiction, while nicotine addiction was rated as more effective than control themes about vaping litter. To discourage vaping among adolescents, health messaging should expand message themes to communicate about a broader set of health effects of vaping beyond nicotine addiction.

Primary care professionals' support for Covid-19 vaccination mandates: Findings from a US national survey

Healthcare organizations have been early adopters of Covid-19 vaccine mandates as a strategy to end the pandemic. We sought to evaluate support for such mandates among pediatric primary care professionals (PCPs) in the United States. In February-March 2021, we conducted a national online survey of 1,047 PCPs (71% physicians). We used multivariable logistic regression to assess correlates of PCPs' support for Covid-19 vaccine mandates for health care workers. Most PCPs supported Covid-19 vaccine mandates for health care workers (83%). PCPs were more likely to support mandates if they perceived health care workers to be at highest risk of getting Covid-19 compared to other worker types (8 percentage points, p < 0.01). PCPs were also more likely to support mandates if their clinic recommended or required vaccination (11 percentage points and 20 percentage points respectively, both p < 0.01). However, PCPs were less likely to support mandates if their clinic offered incentives to vaccinate (10 percentage points, p < 0.05). Clinic recommendations and requirements for Covid-19 vaccination may increase support for mandates. Incentives may decrease support, perhaps by creating the perception that viable alternatives to mandates exist.