COVID-19 Vaccine Decision-making Factors in Racial and Ethnic Minority Communities in Los Angeles, California

Hesitant or Confident: A Qualitative Study Examining Latinos' Perceptions of COVID-19 Vaccines in Arizona

This study aimed to understand vaccine hesitancy and confidence toward the COVID-19 vaccines among Latino adults in Arizona. Latinos (n = 71) aged 18 years or older who resided in Arizona participated in 14 focus groups between February and June 2021. Theoretical thematic analysis was used to examine drivers of these two behaviors, namely, vaccine hesitancy and confidence toward the COVID-19 vaccines, using the COM-B model, comprising capability, opportunity, and motivation factors that generate a behavior. Vaccine hesitancy stemmed from the need for vaccine information (capability factor) and fear of the vaccines, religious beliefs, and perceived barriers stemming from government mistrust (motivation factors). Vaccine confidence arose from trust in science and doctors (capability factor), and a fear of getting sick, protection against COVID-19, getting vaccinated as a civic duty, and a desire to return to normal life (motivation factors). The influence of opportunity factors, such as having access to vaccinations, were not discussed as contributing to vaccine confidence or hesitancy. As predicted by the COM-B model, factors reflecting capabilities and motivations contributed to vaccine hesitancy and confidence, all of which need to be considered in public health messaging. These factors can be targeted to facilitate efforts to promote vaccine uptake and reduce the spread of COVID-19.

Unmasking vaccine hesitancy and refusal: a deep dive into Anti-vaxxer perspectives on COVID-19 in Spain

BACKGROUND

At the time of the emergence of COVID-19, denialist and anti-vaccine groups have also emerged and are shaking public confidence in vaccination.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted using online focus groups. Participants had not received any doses of vaccination against the disease. A total of five focus group sessions were conducted with 28 participants. They were recruited by snowball sampling and by convenience sampling.

RESULTS

The two major topics mentioned by the participants were adverse effects and information. The adverse effects described were severe and included sudden death. In the case of information, participants reported: (1) consultation of websites on which scientists posted anti-vaccination content; and (2) distrust.

CONCLUSIONS

At a time when anti-vaccine groups pose a major challenge to public health in general, and to COVID-19 vaccination campaigns in particular, this study is a first step towards gaining deeper insight into the factors that lead to COVID-19 vaccine refusal.

Evaluation of the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign ¡Ándale! ¿Qué Esperas? in Latinx Communities in California, June 2021-May 2022

OBJECTIVES

The 12-month vaccination campaign ¡Ándale! ¿Qué Esperas? was launched to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates in Latinx populations in California by expanding community outreach. The objectives of this evaluation were to (1) determine predictors of vaccination rates and (2) identify barriers to vaccination and potential solutions.

METHODS

Five community partners in California serving Latinx populations with high social vulnerability participated in the ¡Ándale! ¿Qué Esperas? campaign. Community health workers were hired to deliver outreach (virtual, one-on-one, group based, and information dissemination), vaccinations, and supportive services. We collected data on outreach strategy used (method and location), number of vaccinations provided and reasons for delay, and number of times that supportive services were provided. We used regression models to assess significant predictors of vaccinations and supportive services.

RESULTS

Community health workers (N = 146) hired from June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022, performed outreach engagements (n = 6297) and supportive services (n = 313 796), resulting in 130 413 vaccinations and 28 660 vaccine appointments. The number of vaccinations administered was significantly higher at events in which supportive services were provided versus not provided (coefficient = 34.02; 95% CI, 3.34-64.68; P = .03). The odds ratio of supportive services was 3.67 (95% CI, 1.76-7.55) during virtual outreach and 2.95 (95% CI, 2.37-3.69) during one-on-one outreach (P < .001 for both) as compared with information dissemination encounters. Vaccination concerns were reported among 55.0% of vaccinated survey respondents (67.7%, vaccine confidence; 51.7%, access).

CONCLUSIONS

Supportive services facilitate vaccinations, ease transportation and time barriers, and instill confidence among working-class racial and ethnic minority populations.

Sociocultural Antecedents and Mechanisms of COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake among Mexican-Origin Youth

Mexican-origin youth, as a large and growing population among U.S. youth, have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19. Understanding what, when, and how sociocultural factors may influence their COVID-19 vaccine uptake could inform current and future pandemic-response interventions promoting vaccination behaviors among Mexican-origin youth. The current study takes a developmental approach to reveal the long-term and short-term sociocultural antecedents of 198 Mexican-origin adolescents' COVID-19 vaccination uptake behaviors and explores the underlying mechanism of these associations based on the Knowledge-Attitude-Behavior model. The current study adopted Wave 1 (2012-2015) and Wave 4 (2021-2022) self-reported data from a larger study. Analyses were conducted to examine four mediation models for four sociocultural antecedents-daily discrimination, ethnic discrimination, foreigner stress, and family economic stress-separately. Consistent indirect effects of higher levels of concurrent sociocultural risk factors on a lower probability of COVID-19 vaccine uptake were observed to occur through less knowledge about the COVID-19 vaccines and less positive attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccines at Wave 4. Significant direct effects, but in opposite directions, were found for the associations between Wave 1 ethnic discrimination/Wave 4 daily discrimination and the probability of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. The findings highlight the importance of considering prior and concurrent sociocultural antecedents and the Knowledge-Attitude-Behavior pathway leading to COVID-19 vaccination uptake among Mexican-origin youth and suggest that the impact of discrimination on COVID-19 vaccination uptake may depend on the type (e.g., daily or ethnic) and the context (e.g., during the COVID-19 pandemic or not) of discrimination experienced.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 Vaccine for Preventing COVID-19-Related Hospitalizations: A Test-Negative Case-Control Study

It is important to understand real-world BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE), especially among racial and ethnic minority groups. We performed a test-negative case-control study to measure BNT162b2 COVID-19 VE in the prevention of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory illness (ARI) hospitalizations at two Atlanta hospitals from May 2021-January 2023 and adjusted for potential confounders by multivariate analysis. Among 5139 eligible adults with ARI, 2763 (53.8%) were enrolled, and 1571 (64.5%) were included in the BNT162b2 analysis. The median age was 58 years (IQR, 44-68), 889 (56.6%) were female, 1034 (65.8%) were African American, 359 (22.9%) were White, 56 (3.6%) were Hispanic ethnicity, 645 (41.1%) were SARS-CoV-2-positive, 412 (26.2%) were vaccinated with a primary series, and 273 (17.4%) had received ≥1 booster of BNT162b2. The overall adjusted VE of the BNT162b2 primary series was 58.5% (95% CI 46.0, 68.1), while the adjusted VE of ≥1 booster was 78.9% (95% CI 70.0, 85.1). The adjusted overall VE of primary series for African American/Black individuals was 64.0% (95% CI 49.9, 74.1) and 82.7% (95% CI 71.9, 89.4) in those who received ≥1 booster. When analysis was limited to the period of Omicron predominance, overall VE of the primary series decreased with widened confidence intervals (24.5%, 95% CI -4.5, 45.4%), while VE of ≥1 booster was maintained at 60.9% (95% CI 42.0, 73.6). BNT162b2 primary series and booster vaccination provided protection against COVID-19-associated ARI hospitalization among a predominantly African American population.

Continuum of Trauma: Fear and Mistrust of Institutions in Communities of Color During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Historical, cultural, and social trauma, along with social determinants of health (SDOH), shape health outcomes, attitudes toward medicine, government, and health behaviors among communities of color in the United States (U.S.). This study explores how trauma and fear influence COVID-19 testing and vaccination among Black/African American, Latinx/Indigenous Latin American, and Native American/Indigenous communities. Leveraging community-based participatory research methods, we conducted 11 virtual focus groups from January to March of 2021 with Black/African American (n = 4), Latinx/Indigenous Latin American (n = 4), and Native American/Indigenous (n = 3) identifying community members in Inland Southern California. Our team employed rapid analytic approaches (e.g., template and matrix analysis) to summarize data and identify themes across focus groups and used theories of intersectionality and trauma to meaningfully interpret study findings. Historical, cultural, and social trauma induce fear and mistrust in public health and medical institutions influencing COVID-19 testing and vaccination decisions in communities of color in Inland Southern California. This work showcases the need for culturally and structurally sensitive community-based health interventions that attend to the historical, cultural, and social traumas unique to racial/ethnic minority populations in the U.S. that underlie fear and mistrust of medical, scientific, and governmental institutions.

Temporal trends and characteristics associated with racial, ethnic, and sex representation in COVID-19 clinical trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Early in the pandemic, extensive attention was cast on limited inclusion of historically underrepresented patient populations in COVID-19 clinical trials. How diverse representation improved following these initial reports remains unclear.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched (through April 2024) for US-based COVID-19 trials. Utilizing random-effects, we compared expected proportions of trial participants from racial and ethnic groups and of female sex between trials enrolling primarily in 2020 versus primarily 2021-2022. Meta-regression was performed to assess associations between trial characteristics and group representation.

RESULTS

We retrieved 157 studies comprising 198,012 participants. White (2020: 63.1% [95% CI, 60.8%-67.3%]; 2021-2022: 73.8% [95% CI, 71.5%-76.0%]) and female representation (2020: 46.1% [95% CI, 44.7%-47.4%)]; 2021-2022: 51.1% [95% CI, 49.3%-52.8%) increased across enrollment periods. Industry-sponsored trials were associated with higher White (coefficient, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.03-0.18]) and Hispanic or Latinx representation (coefficient, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.08-0.25]) and lower Asian (coefficient, -0.03 [95% CI, -0.06- -0.003]) and female representation (coefficient, -0.03 [95% CI, -0.07- -0.002]). Outpatient trials were associated with higher White (coefficient, 0.20 [95% CI, 0.13-0.26]) and female representation (coefficient, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.13-0.18]), and lower Black representation (coefficient, -0.10 [95% CI, -0.10- -0.08]).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite improved female representation in COVID-19 trials over time, there was no clear increase in non-White representation. Trial characteristics such as primary sponsor, clinical setting, and intervention type correlate with representation of specific demographic groups and should be considered in future efforts to improve participant diversity.

The Cultural Influence of Familismo in Prompting Vaccination Against COVID-19 Among U.S. Latina/o/x Border Residents

This study centers on familismo as a relevant cultural construct that adds a U.S. Latina/o/x perspective to the Health Belief Model. Employing a qualitative lens, we use in-depth semi-structured focus groups and interviews with participants living, working, and attending school in a mid-size city on the U.S./Mexico border on the decision to take the COVID-19 vaccine. We find that, for many members of these communities, getting vaccinated is seen as a way to protect not only oneself but also one's family, especially those with chronic health conditions, reflecting an obligation to prioritize the collective over the individual. We highlight various approaches that families take to discuss COVID-19 vaccines, ranging from women coordinating vaccination to a non-confrontational approach to the unvaccinated. The borderlands as a place also showcase the diversity of the U.S. Latina/o/x experience during the pandemic, since the perceived disparities of vaccine access in Mexico also seemed to cue the decision to get vaccinated. We propose this helps explain the exceptionally high vaccination rate in the city under study and seen in several other border communities. By illuminating how familial ties impact health communication surrounding this important issue, this study adds an expanded Latina/o/x cultural context for aspects of the Health Belief Model such as perceived severity and susceptibility.

MivacunaLA (MyshotLA): A Community-Partnered Mobile Phone Intervention to Improve COVID-19 Vaccination Behaviors among Low-Income, Spanish-Speaking, and Immigrant Latino Parents or Caregivers

We developed and tested MivacunaLA/MyshotLA, a community-informed mobile phone intervention, to increase COVID-19 vaccination among Latino parents/caretakers of minors in under-resourced areas of Los Angeles by addressing misinformation and building trust. We recruited Latino parents/caregivers with at least one unvaccinated child in East and South Los Angeles in the summer of 2021 and evaluated MivacunaLA as a randomized controlled trial with a wait-list control group. A difference-in-difference analysis showed Latino parents/caregivers that participated in MivacunaLA (n = 246), in comparison to the control group, were 15 percentage points more likely (p = 0.04) to report vaccination of minors aged 12-17 years, and 12 percentage points more likely (p = 0.03) to report a positive intention to vaccinate minors aged 2-11 years (when COVID-19 vaccines became available). Mobile phone-delivered digital interventions using videos and culturally tailored educational material to promote COVID-19 vaccine confidence can be an effective way to combat misinformation and deliver timely information to marginalized communities. Community-based participatory research approaches are crucial to advance health equity among minority communities, especially immigrant Spanish-speaking underserved communities.

Community Resilience and Cultural Responses in Crisis: Lessons Learned from Pacific Islander Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic in the USA

Pacific Islander communities in the USA experienced some of the most severe effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. This qualitative synthesis examines the literature on Pacific Islander community responses and lessons learned from COVID-19, using a systematic search that identified 28 articles with this focus. Thematic analysis was subsequently used to classify both documented efforts by Pacific Islander communities to respond to the pandemic, as well as lessons learned and best practices from research in this area. Results revealed multiple efforts to address the pandemic, including Pacific Islander grassroots approaches, government responses, inter-sector collaboration, and research. Results further emphasized the importance of culturally and linguistically responsive outreach and messaging; partnership, engagement, and capacity building; and changes in research and policy approaches to promote health equity. Future efforts to address public health crises should make the most of Pacific Islander cultural approaches to disaster response. To achieve this, government and other organizations that work with PI communities need to support the development of the PI leadership, healthcare and research workforces, and work with Pacific Islander communities to build long-term, sustainable, and trustworthy partnerships.

"There's a little bit of mistrust": Red River Métis experiences of the H1N1 and COVID-19 pandemics

We examined the perspectives of the Red River Métis citizens in Manitoba, Canada, during the H1N1 and COVID-19 pandemics and how they interpreted the communication of government/health authorities' risk management decisions. For Indigenous populations, pandemic response strategies play out within the context of ongoing colonial relationships with government institutions characterized by significant distrust. A crucial difference between the two pandemics was that the Métis in Manitoba were prioritized for early vaccine access during H1N1 but not for COVID-19. Data collection involved 17 focus groups with Métis citizens following the H1N1 outbreak and 17 focus groups during the COVID-19 pandemic. Métis prioritization during H1N1 was met with some apprehension and fear that Indigenous Peoples were vaccine-safety test subjects before population-wide distribution occurred. By contrast, as one of Canada's three recognized Indigenous nations, the non-prioritization of the Métis during COVID-19 was viewed as an egregious sign of disrespect and indifference. Our research demonstrates that both reactions were situated within claims that the government does not care about the Métis, referencing past and ongoing colonial motivations. Government and health institutions must anticipate this overarching colonial context when making and communicating risk management decisions with Indigenous Peoples. In this vein, government authorities must work toward a praxis of decolonization in these relationships, including, for example, working in partnership with Indigenous nations to engage in collaborative risk mitigation and communication that meets the unique needs of Indigenous populations and limits the potential for less benign-though understandable-interpretations.

Exploring the reasons behind low COVID-19 vaccination coverage in ethnic minorities-A qualitative study among Arabic-speaking public in Denmark

AIMS

In Denmark, COVID-19 infection rates have been higher, and vaccination coverage has been lower in areas with many residents from ethnic minority backgrounds. This study aimed to explore COVID-19 vaccination perceptions among Arabic-speaking minorities in Denmark.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 16 individuals, varying in age, gender, education, employment, health, vaccination status, and the Arabic-speaking country of origin, were recruited and interviewed in Arabic. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, translated into English, and analyzed using directed thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Most interviewees had some knowledge about how vaccines work to prevent infections; however, a wide spectrum of opinions about the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination policies in Denmark emerged. COVID-19 vaccination issues were extensively discussed in Arabic-speaking communities, but consensus was rarely reached. Many participants felt confused and only took vaccines for practical considerations, such as travel. Due to language barriers, some participants experienced difficulties in understanding vaccination-related information in electronic invitations from the health authorities and at vaccination centers, with family members often stepping in to provide translations.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic efforts to actively disseminate translated COVID-19 vaccination information are needed to support ethnic minority individuals in making informed decisions.

Development of COVID-19 vaccine policy - United States, 2020-2023

COVID-19 vaccines represent a great scientific and public health achievement in the face of overwhelming pressures from a global pandemic, preventing millions of hospitalizations and deaths due to COVID-19 vaccines in the United States. Over 675 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines have been administered in the United States, and over 80% of the U.S. population has had at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, over one million people died from COVID-19, and over six million were hospitalized. It has been estimated that COVID-19 vaccines prevented more than 18 million additional hospitalizations and more than 3 million additional deaths due to COVID-19 in the United States. From the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 through June 2023, ACIP had 35 COVID-19 focused meetings and 24 votes for COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. ACIP had the critical task of rapidly and thoroughly reviewing emerging and evolving data on COVID-19 epidemiology and vaccines, as well as making comprehensive population-based recommendations for vaccine policy and considerations for implementation through a transparent and evidence-based framework. Safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines, recommended through transparent policy discussions with ACIP, remain the best tool we have to prevent serious illness, hospitalization and death from COVID-19.

Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Under-Vaccination among Marginalized Populations in the United States and Canada: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Amid persistent disparities in Covid-19 vaccination and burgeoning research on vaccine hesitancy (VH), we conducted a scoping review to identify multilevel determinants of Covid-19 VH and under-vaccination among marginalized populations in the U.S. and Canada.

METHODS

Using the scoping review methodology developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute, we designed a search string and explored 7 databases to identify peer-reviewed articles published from January 1, 2020-October 25, 2022. We combine frequency analysis and narrative synthesis to describe factors influencing Covid-19 VH and under-vaccination among marginalized populations.

RESULTS

The search captured 11,374 non-duplicated records, scoped to 103 peer-reviewed articles. Among 14 marginalized populations identified, African American/Black, Latinx, LGBTQ+, American Indian/Indigenous, people with disabilities, and justice-involved people were the predominant focus. Thirty-two factors emerged as influencing Covid-19 VH, with structural racism/stigma and institutional mistrust (structural)(n = 71) most prevalent, followed by vaccine safety (vaccine-specific)(n = 62), side effects (vaccine-specific)(n = 50), trust in individual healthcare provider (social/community)(n = 38), and perceived risk of infection (individual)(n = 33). Structural factors predominated across populations, including structural racism/stigma and institutional mistrust, barriers to Covid-19 vaccine access due to limited supply/availability, distance/lack of transportation, no/low paid sick days, low internet/digital technology access, and lack of culturally- and linguistically-appropriate information.

DISCUSSION

We identified multilevel and complex drivers of Covid-19 under-vaccination among marginalized populations. Distinguishing vaccine-specific, individual, and social/community factors that may fuel decisional ambivalence, more appropriately defined as VH, from structural racism/structural stigma and systemic/institutional barriers to vaccination access may better support evidence-informed interventions to promote equity in access to vaccines and informed decision-making among marginalized populations.

COVID-19 vaccine decision-making in remote Alaska between November 2020 and November 2021

Vaccine hesitancy is an ongoing barrier to achieve sufficient COVID-19 vaccination coverage. Although there are many studies globally of vaccine hesitancy based on large survey samples, there are fewer in-depth qualitative studies that explore vaccine hesitancy and acceptance as a spectrum of decision-making. In this paper, we begin to describe vaccination decision-making among 58 adults living in remote Alaska based on three waves of online surveys and follow-up semi-structured interviews conducted between November 2020 and November 2021. The survey question of intention was not a predictor of adoption for about one third of the interviewees who were unvaccinated when they took the survey (n=12, 35%). Over half of all interviewees (n=37, 64%) had vaccine-related concerns, including 25 vaccinated individuals (representing 57% of vaccinated interviewees). Most interviewees reported that they learned about COVID-19 vaccines through interpersonal interactions (n=30, 52%) and/or a variety of media sources (n=29, 50%). The major facilitators of acceptance were trust in the information source (n=20, 48% of the 42 who responded), and learning from the experiences of family, friends, and the broader community (n=12, 29%). Further, trust and having a sense of agency appears to be important to interviewee decision-making, regardless of vaccination status and intention.

Understanding Stakeholders' Perspectives to Increase COVID-19 Vaccine and Booster Uptake Among Black Individuals With Rheumatic Conditions

OBJECTIVE

Disparities in COVID-19 vaccine and booster uptake persist. This study aimed to obtain perspectives from community and physician stakeholders on COVID-19 vaccine and booster hesitancy and strategies to promote vaccine uptake among Black individuals with rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions.

METHODS

We invited community leaders and physicians in greater Boston and Chicago to participate in semi-structured interviews using a moderator guide developed a priori. Participants were queried about how to best address vaccine hesitancy, strategies to target high-risk populations, and factors to identify future community leaders. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically using Dedoose.

RESULTS

A total of 8 physicians and 12 community leaders participated in this study between November 2021 and October 2022. Qualitative analyses revealed misinformation/mixed messaging and mistrust, with subthemes including conspiracy theories, concerns regarding vaccine development and function, racism and historical injustices, and general mistrust of health care systems as the top cited reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Participants also shared demographic-specific differences, such as race, ethnicity, age, and gender that influenced the identified themes, with emphasis on COVID-19 vaccine access and apathy. Strategies for community-based vaccine-related information dissemination included personal storytelling with an iterative and empathetic approach, while recognizing the importance of protecting community leader well-being.

CONCLUSION

To increase vaccine uptake among Black individuals with rheumatic conditions, strategies should acknowledge and respond to racial/ethnic and socioeconomic injustices that engender vaccine hesitancy. Messaging should be compassionate, individually tailored, and recognize heterogeneity in experiences and opinions. Results from these analyses will inform a planned community-based intervention in Boston and Chicago.

Black in the pandemic: Comparing experiences of mistrust, anxiety, and the COVID-19 vaccine among Black adults in the U.S

COVID-19 vaccine decisions are shaped by many factors including historical and contemporary patterns of medical mistreatment of marginalized communities. In attending to these concerns, we measured whether fear of COVID-19, general feelings of mistrust, and race-specific mistrust of the government and healthcare providers are indirectly associated with COVID-19 vaccination status via anxiety among Black Americans. We analyzed responses from 996 Black adults who participated in the AmeriSpeak panel - a nationally representative probability-based sample recruited from the National Opinion Research Center from April-June 2022. We used multiple-group structural equation modeling to compare outcomes among those who lost a loved one to COVID-19 to those who did not. Results indicate that fear of COVID-19 was associated with a greater probability of being fully vaccinated for those who lost a family member/friend. Race-specific mistrust was positively associated with anxiety, but was negatively associated with being fully vaccinated for bereaved Black Americans. Targeted efforts are needed to specifically reach those who lost a loved one to COVID-19. More within-group evaluations are needed to identify barriers to COVID-19 vaccination that are specific to Black Americans living with loss and grief.

Calculation, knowledge, and identity: Dimensions of trust when making COVID-19 vaccination choices in China

Vaccine hesitancy threatens the response to the COVID-19 pandemic and to other infectious disease outbreaks globally. Fostering trust has been highlighted as a critical factor in addressing vaccine hesitancy and expanding vaccine coverage, but qualitative exploration of trust in the context of vaccination remains limited. We contribute to filling this gap by providing a comprehensive qualitative analysis of trust in the context of COVID-19 vaccination in China. We conducted 40 in-depth interviews with Chinese adults in December 2020. During data collection, trust emerged as a highly salient topic. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, translated into English, and analyzed with a combination of inductive and deductive coding. Following established trust literature, we differentiate between three types of trust - calculation-based trust, knowledge-based trust, and identity-based trust - which we grouped across components of the health system, as informed by the WHO's building blocks. Our results highlight how participants attributed their level of trust in COVID-19 vaccines to their trust in the medical technology itself (based on assessing risks and benefits or previous vaccination experiences), the service delivery and health workforce (informed by past experiences with health providers and their role throughout the pandemic), and leadership and governance (drawing on notions of government performance and patriotism). Reducing negative impact from past vaccine controversies, increasing the credibility of pharmaceutical companies, and fostering clear communication are identified as important channels for facilitating trust. Our findings emphasize a strong need for comprehensive information on COVID-19 vaccines and increased promotion of vaccination by credible figures.

Willingness to Receive the COVID-19 Vaccine in California: Disparities by Race and Citizenship Status

Although it is widely acknowledged that racialized minorities may report lower COVID-19 vaccine willingness compared to non-Hispanic white individuals, what is less known, however, is whether the willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine also differs by citizenship. Understanding disparities in vaccine willingness by citizenship is particularly important given the misleading rhetoric of some political leaders regarding vaccine eligibility by citizenship status. This study used the 2020 California Health Interview Survey (n = 21,949) to examine disparities in vaccine willingness by race/ethnicity and citizenship among Asian, Latinx, and non-Hispanic white individuals. Overall, 77.7% of Californians indicated that they were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine if it was made available. However, there were distinct differences by race/ethnicity and citizenship. Asian people, regardless of citizenship, had the highest predicted probability of vaccine willingness, accounting for demographic, socioeconomic, and health factors. Non-citizen Latinx and non-citizen non-Hispanic white people had higher predicted probabilities of vaccine willingness compared to their US-born counterparts, accounting for demographic, socioeconomic, and health factors. Our results reveal that although vaccine willingness may be high among non-citizen individuals, it may not necessarily translate into actual vaccine uptake. Furthermore, while individual-level factors may account for some of the differences in vaccine willingness by race/ethnicity and citizenship, other institutional and structural barriers prevent vaccine uptake.

Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the Hispanic adult population of South Carolina: a complex mixed-method design evaluation study

BACKGROUND

In August 2021, only 47.6% of all eligible residents in South Carolina (SC) had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, with only 41% having completed their vaccination series. Additionally, only 27% of all Hispanics in SC had completed their vaccination series compared to 34.1% of non-Hispanics. Vaccine hesitancy is a complex phenomenon that is context and vaccine-specific. Focusing on unvaccinated Hispanics living in rural areas of SC, this study aimed to identify barriers to vaccination and provide an educational intervention designed to address vaccine hesitancy.

METHODS

A complex mixed-methods evaluation design was used to conduct this study. First, in-person vaccine educational sessions were implemented, along with a pre-post-test survey, to assess changes in knowledge, attitudes, motivations, barriers, and intentions to receive COVID-19 vaccination. Second, in-person follow-up focus groups were held with the same participants to gather in-depth insight about participants' knowledge and attitudes about the COVID-19 vaccination. Third, an online follow-up survey was conducted to assess the effect of the training and discussion session on COVID-19 vaccination. Study outcomes were assessed among the 17 individuals who participated in the educational sessions and focus group discussions.

RESULTS

Findings revealed that for unvaccinated Hispanics living in South Carolina; vaccine hesitancy was primarily driven by: 1) misinformation and information coming from unverified sources and 2) negative perceptions of the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines. Specifically, participants were fearful that the vaccine development was rushed and that the vaccines might contain questionable ingredients that could cause strong side effects or even death. Participants were also concerned that vaccination might cause them to get sick and be hospitalized, which would have financial implications since they could not afford healthcare or take time off work.

CONCLUSIONS

Program implementation and mass communication campaigns should focus on COVID-19 vaccine safety and effectiveness, including side effects, what to expect after being vaccinated, and how to look for information from reputable sources. The educational session implemented proved to be effective and helped reduce vaccine hesitancy since most participants (80%) self-reported receiving a COVID-19 vaccine after program participation.

Racial disparities in COVID-19 vaccination in Canada: results from the cross-sectional Canadian Community Health Survey

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage have been observed in Canada and in other countries. We aimed to compare vaccination coverage for at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine between First Nations people living off reserve and Métis, Black, Arab, Chinese, South Asian and White people.

METHODS

We used data collected between June 2021 and June 2022 by Statistics Canada's Canadian Community Health Survey, a large, nationally representative cross-sectional study. The analysis included 64 722 participants aged 18 years or older from the 10 provinces. We used a multiple logistic regression model to determine associations between vaccination status and race, controlling for collection period, region of residence, age, gender and education.

RESULTS

Nonvaccination against COVID-19 was more frequent in off-reserve First Nations people (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-2.7) and Black people (adjusted OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.6), and less frequent among South Asian people (adjusted OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.7) compared to White people.

INTERPRETATION

This analysis showed significant inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake between racial/ethnic populations in Canada. Further research is needed to understand the sociocultural, structural and systemic facilitators of and barriers to vaccination across racial groups, and to identify strategies that may improve vaccination uptake among First Nations and Black people.

"In the beginning, I said I wouldn't get it.": Hesitant adoption of the COVID-19 vaccine in remote Alaska between November 2020 and 2021

Achieving sufficient COVID-19 vaccination coverage has been hindered in many areas by vaccine hesitancy. Many studies based on large survey samples have characterized vaccine refusal, but there are fewer in-depth qualitative studies that explore hesitant adoption: the middle-ground between vaccine acceptance and refusal, and how individuals may move across this continuum depending on their lived experience. For this paper, we use the narratives of 25 adults living in off-road, predominately Alaska Native communities to describe the complex decision-making processes undertaken by 'hesitant adopters', defined in our study as those who completed their initial COVID-19 series despite reporting hesitancy. Interviewees' stories help illustrate how hesitant adopters' decision-making processes involved making sense of information through interactions with trusted individuals, lived experiences, observations, emotions, and personal motivations. For the majority of these hesitant adopters' (n = 20, 80%) interpersonal interactions were key in helping to make the decision to get vaccinated. Over half of the interviewees (n = 14, 56%) described how conversations with individuals they trusted, including healthcare providers, family, friends, and interactions through their professional network made them feel safe. One third of the hesitant adopters (n = 7, 28%) attributed their decision to get vaccinated based on the influence of Alaska Native Elders including their knowledge, personal experiences, as well as being motivated by the desire to protect them. Independent research was also important to about a quarter of hesitant adopters (n = 6, 24%), and for these interviewees it was the process of gathering information on their own and learning from others, especially healthcare providers who could answer their questions and alleviate their concerns. This paper illustrates the temporality of vaccine decision-making: vaccine acceptance for those who are hesitant may be an ongoing process that is influenced by personal experience, relationships, and context.

Persuasive COVID-19 vaccination campaigns on Facebook and nationwide vaccination coverage in Ukraine, India, and Pakistan

Social media platforms have a wide and influential reach, and as such provide an opportunity to increase vaccine uptake. To date, there is no large-scale, robust evidence on the offline effects of online messaging campaigns. We aimed to test whether pre-tested, persuasive messaging campaigns from UNICEF, disseminated on Facebook, influenced COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Ukraine, India, and Pakistan. In Ukraine, we deployed a stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial (RCT). Half of the 24 oblasts (provinces) received five weeks of the intervention, the other half ten weeks of the intervention. In India, an RCT with an augmented synthetic control was conducted in five states (Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan), whereby 40 out of 174 districts were randomized to receive six weeks of intervention. In Pakistan we deployed a pre-post design, whereby 25 city districts received six weeks of the intervention. Weekly COVID-19 vaccination data was sourced through government databases. Using Poisson regression models, the association between the intervention and vaccine uptake was estimated. In Ukraine we conducted a survey among Facebook users at three time points during the RCT, to ascertain vaccination intentions and trust in vaccines. The campaigns reached more than 110 million Facebook users and garnered 2.9 million clicks. In Ukraine, we found that the intervention did not affect oblast-level vaccination coverage (Relative Risk (RR): 0.93, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.86-1.01). Similarly, in India and Pakistan we found no effect of our intervention (India: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70-1.04; Pakistan: RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.01-29.9). The survey among Facebook users in Ukraine showed that trust in vaccines and information sources was an important predictor of vaccination status and intention to get vaccinated. Our campaigns on Facebook had a wide reach, which did not translate in shifting behaviours. Timing and external events may have limited the effectiveness of our interventions.

Adherence to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Recommendations among Patients with Substance Use Disorders: A Cross-Sectional Study in Rome, Italy

Adherence to vaccination recommendations is a challenge for national immunization programs. We quantified adherence to COVID-19 vaccination recommendations in people with substance use disorders (SUDs) attending an outpatient addiction center in Rome, Italy; we investigated the determinants of adherence, and also analyzed patient risk perception and compliance with preventive measures. A multivariable logistic regression model identified predictors of adherence to vaccination recommendations, with statistical validity tested by estimating adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). From December 2021 to January 2022, 200 SUD patients completed a questionnaire, 80% of whom reported being vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 (minimum one dose). Negative predictors of vaccine uptake included being non-Italian (aOR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.13-0.97), having coexisting comorbidities (aOR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.13-0.95), and previous use of heroin (aOR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.71). No difference was found for cocaine use, demographic characteristics, previous COVID-19 infection, methadone therapy, or compliance with preventive measures. Major reasons for non-adherence to vaccination recommendations were fear of side effects, insufficient recognition of the importance of vaccination, bureaucratic issues, and lack of trust in the authorities. Given their vulnerability, additional efforts are needed to facilitate access to vaccination for people with SUDs, and to limit disinformation around vaccines..

What matters to us: Bridging research and accurate information through dialogue (BRAID) to build community trust and cultivate vaccine confidence

Despite higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infections and mortality, vaccine uptake in Black and Latinx populations remained disproportionately low, including in the Bronx, New York. In response, we used the Bridging Research, Accurate Information, and Dialogue (BRAID) model to elicit community members' COViD-19 vaccine-related perspectives and informational needs and inform strategies to improve vaccine acceptance. We conducted a longitudinal qualitative study over 13 months (May 2021-June 2022), with 25 community experts from the Bronx including community health workers, and representatives from community-based organizations. Each expert participated in 1-5 of the 12 conversation circles conducted via Zoom. Clinicians and scientists, attended circles to provide additional information in content areas identified by the experts. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyze the conversations. Five overarching themes, related to trust, emerged: (1) disparate and unjust treatment from institutions; (2) the impact of rapidly changing COVID messages in the lay press (a different story every day); (3) influencers of vaccine intention; (4) strategies to build community trust; and (5) what matters to community experts [us]. Our findings highlighted the influence of factors, such as health communication, on trust (or lack thereof) and vaccine intention. They also reinforce that creating safe spaces for dialogue and listening and responding to community concerns in real time are effective trust-building strategies. The BRAID model fostered open discussion about the factors that influence vaccine uptake and empowered participants to share accurate information with their community. Our experience suggests that the model can be adapted to address many public health issues.

Exposure and Reactions to Cancer Treatment Misinformation and Advice: Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Cancer treatment misinformation, or false claims about alternative cures, often spreads faster and farther than true information on social media. Cancer treatment misinformation can harm the psychosocial and physical health of individuals with cancer and their cancer care networks by causing distress and encouraging people to abandon support, potentially leading to deviations from evidence-based care. There is a pressing need to understand how cancer treatment misinformation is shared and uncover ways to reduce misinformation.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to better understand exposure and reactions to cancer treatment misinformation, including the willingness of study participants to prosocially intervene and their intentions to share Instagram posts with cancer treatment misinformation.

METHODS

We conducted a survey on cancer treatment misinformation among US adults in December 2021. Participants reported their exposure and reactions to cancer treatment misinformation generally (saw or heard, source, type of advice, and curiosity) and specifically on social media (platform, believability). Participants were then randomly assigned to view 1 of 3 cancer treatment misinformation posts or an information post and asked to report their willingness to prosocially intervene and their intentions to share.

RESULTS

Among US adult participants (N=603; mean age 46, SD 18.83 years), including those with cancer and cancer caregivers, almost 1 in 4 (142/603, 23.5%) received advice about alternative ways to treat or cure cancer. Advice was primarily shared through family (39.4%) and friends (37.3%) for digestive (30.3%) and natural (14.1%) alternative cancer treatments, which generated curiosity among most recipients (106/142, 74.6%). More than half of participants (337/603, 55.9%) saw any cancer treatment misinformation on social media, with significantly higher exposure for those with cancer (53/109, 70.6%) than for those without cancer (89/494, 52.6%; P<.001). Participants saw cancer misinformation on Facebook (39.8%), YouTube (27%), Instagram (22.1%), and TikTok (14.1%), among other platforms. Participants (429/603, 71.1%) thought cancer treatment misinformation was true, at least sometimes, on social media. More than half (357/603, 59.2%) were likely to share any cancer misinformation posts shown. Many participants (412/603, 68.3%) were willing to prosocially intervene for any cancer misinformation posts, including flagging the cancer treatment misinformation posts as false (49.7%-51.4%) or reporting them to the platform (48.1%-51.4%). Among the participants, individuals with cancer and those who identified as Black or Hispanic reported greater willingness to intervene to reduce cancer misinformation but also higher intentions to share misinformation.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer treatment misinformation reaches US adults through social media, including on widely used platforms for support. Many believe that social media posts about alternative cancer treatment are true at least some of the time. The willingness of US adults, including those with cancer and members of susceptible populations, to prosocially intervene could initiate the necessary community action to reduce cancer treatment misinformation if coupled with strategies to help individuals discern false claims.

Community-based organization perspectives on participating in state-wide community canvassing program aimed to reduce COVID-19 vaccine disparities in California

BACKGROUND

Inequities in COVID-19 vaccine accessibility and reliable COVID-related information disproportionately affected marginalized racial and ethnic communities in the U.S. The Get Out the Vaccine (GOTVax) program, an innovative statewide government-funded COVID-19 vaccine canvassing program in California, aimed to reduce structural barriers to COVID-19 vaccination in high-risk communities with low vaccination rates. GOTVax consisted of a community-academic-government partnership with 34 local trusted community-based organizations' (CBOs) to conduct COVID-19 vaccine outreach, education, and vaccine registration. The purpose of this qualitative evaluation study was to explore the barriers and facilitators of using local CBOs to deploy a geographically, racially, and ethnically diverse state-wide COVID-19 vaccine outreach program.

METHODS

Semi-structured online interviews were conducted with participating GOTVax CBO leaders from November 2021 to January 2022. Transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-one of 34 CBOs participated (91% response rate). Identified themes encompassed both facilitators and barriers to program participation. Key facilitators included leveraging trust through recognized entities; promoting empathetic, tailored outreach; and flexibility of milestone-based CBO funding contracts for rapid program implementation. Barriers included navigating community sociopolitical, geographic, and cultural factors; managing canvassers' safety; desiring metrics for self-evaluation of outreach success; mitigating canvassing technology challenges; and concerns of program infrastructure initially limiting outreach. CBOs problem-solved barriers with academic and government partners.

CONCLUSIONS

Between May and December 2021, the GOTVax program reached over 2 million California residents and registered over 60,000 residents for COVID-19 vaccination. Public health campaigns may improve benefits from leveraging the expertise of community-trusted CBOs and universities by providing flexible infrastructure and funding, allowing CBOs to seamlessly tailor outreach most applicable to local minoritized communities.

On the use of aspect-based sentiment analysis of Twitter data to explore the experiences of African Americans during COVID-19

According to data from the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention, as of June 2020, a significant number of African Americans had been infected with the coronavirus disease, experiencing disproportionately higher death rates compared to other demographic groups. These disparities highlight the urgent need to examine the experiences, behaviors, and opinions of the African American population in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. By understanding their unique challenges in navigating matters of health and well-being, we can work towards promoting health equity, eliminating disparities, and addressing persistent barriers to care. Since Twitter data has shown significant promise as a representation of human behavior and for opinion mining, this study leverages Twitter data published in 2020 to characterize the pandemic-related experiences of the United States' African American population using aspect-based sentiment analysis. Sentiment analysis is a common task in natural language processing that identifies the emotional tone (i.e., positive, negative, or neutral) of a text sample. Aspect-based sentiment analysis increases the granularity of sentiment analysis by also extracting the aspect for which sentiment is expressed. We developed a machine learning pipeline consisting of image and language-based classification models to filter out tweets not related to COVID-19 and those unlikely published by African American Twitter subscribers, leading to an analysis of nearly 4 million tweets. Overall, our results show that the majority of tweets had a negative tone, and that the days with larger numbers of published tweets often coincided with major U.S. events related to the pandemic as suggested by major news headlines (e.g., vaccine rollout). We also show how word usage evolved throughout the year (e.g., outbreak to pandemic and coronavirus to covid). This work also points to important issues like food insecurity and vaccine hesitation, along with exposing semantic relationships between words, such as covid and exhausted. As such, this work furthers understanding of how the nationwide progression of the pandemic may have impacted the narratives of African American Twitter users.

Barriers to and facilitators of populational adherence to prevention and control measures of COVID-19 and other respiratory infectious diseases: a qualitative evidence synthesis

AIMS

To summarise the evidence on barriers to and facilitators of population adherence to prevention and control measures for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and other respiratory infectious diseases.

METHODS

A qualitative synthesis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care: Qualitative Evidence Synthesis. We performed an electronic search on MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO from their inception to March 2023.

RESULTS

We included 71 studies regarding COVID-19, pneumonia, tuberculosis, influenza, pertussis and H1N1, representing 5966 participants. The measures reported were vaccinations, physical distancing, stay-at-home policy, quarantine, self-isolation, facemasks, hand hygiene, contact investigation, lockdown, infection prevention and control guidelines, and treatment. Tuberculosis-related measures were access to care, diagnosis and treatment completion. Analysis of the included studies yielded 37 barriers and 23 facilitators.

CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that financial and social support, assertive communication, trust in political authorities and greater regulation of social media enhance adherence to prevention and control measures for COVID-19 and infectious respiratory diseases. Designing and implementing effective educational public health interventions targeting the findings of barriers and facilitators highlighted in this review are key to reducing the impact of infectious respiratory diseases at the population level.

COVID-19 Vaccine Decision-Making Among Black Pregnant and Postpartum Women

INTRODUCTION

The history of biomedical research is marred by racially discriminatory and abusive practices that impacted Black/African Americans. Medical racism impacts the trust and utilization of new medical interventions, such as the COVID-19 vaccine. This study aimed to understand Black pregnant and postpartum women's perspectives and decision-making about the COVID-19 vaccine.

METHODS

We used a qualitative descriptive design and recruited 23 pregnant and postpartum Black women aged 18 years and above. Data was collected using a semi-structured interview guide. Data were analyzed using content analysis.

FINDINGS

The participants described factors influencing their decision to receive or not receive the COVID-19 vaccines. These factors included individual, cultural, ethnicity, religious, and family-related factors (individual-personal beliefs influenced decisions about the vaccine; ethnicity, culture, and religion influenced vaccine decision-making; group-family and friends played a role in decision-making), vaccine or vaccination-related issues (concerns about vaccination and pregnancy outcomes and mistrust in the vaccine information), and contextual influence (sources of vaccine information influenced decision-making and healthcare providers influenced decision-making).

CONCLUSION

Understanding the vaccine decision-making process of underserved populations likely to decline vaccination due to pregnancy, postpartum, and breastfeeding status will help design tailored interventions to improve vaccine acceptance in minority communities, especially for pregnant and postpartum women.

Evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine implementation in a large safety net health system

Objectives

To evaluate rapid COVID-19 vaccine clinic implementation from January-April 2021 in the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LACDHS), the second-largest US safety net health system. During initial vaccine clinic implementation, LACDHS vaccinated 59,898 outpatients, 69% of whom were Latinx (exceeding the LA County Latinx population of 46%). LACDHS is a unique safety net setting to evaluate rapid vaccine implementation due to system size, geographic breadth, language/racial/ethnic diversity, limited health staffing resources, and socioeconomic complexity of patients.

Methods

Implementation factors were assessed through semi-structured interviews of staff from all twelve LACDHS vaccine clinics from August-November 2021 using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and themes analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis.

Results

Of 40 potential participants, 25 health professionals completed an interview (27% clinical providers/medical directors, 23% pharmacist, 15% nursing staff, and 35% other). Qualitative analysis of participant interviews yielded ten narrative themes. Implementation facilitators included bidirectional communication between system leadership and clinics, multidisciplinary leadership and operations teams, expanded use of standing orders, teamwork culture, use of active and passive communication structures, and development of patient-centered engagement strategies. Barriers to implementation included vaccine scarcity, underestimation of resources needed for patient outreach, and numerous process challenges encountered.

Conclusion

Previous studies focused on robust advance planning as a facilitator and understaffing and high staff turnover as barriers to implementation in safety net health systems. This study found facilitators that can mitigate lack of advance planning and staffing challenges present during public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The ten identified themes may inform future implementations in safety net health systems.

Reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in ethnic minority groups: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of initial attitudes in qualitative research

Despite being disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, ethnic and racial minority groups show widespread vaccine hesitancy. Adherence to ongoing booster vaccine campaigns is required to contain future spread of the virus and protect health systems. This review aims to appraise and synthesise qualitative studies published from December 2021 to February 2022 addressing the issue for an in-depth exploration of initial COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in minorities, including refugee, asylum seeker and migrant populations. A systematic literature search of five databases identified 15 eligible studies. Thematic synthesis identified three main themes of "institutional mistrust", "lack of confidence in vaccine and vaccine development process", and "lack of reliable information or messengers". Two minor themes included "complacency/perceived lack of need" and "structural barriers to vaccine access". "Institutional mistrust" permeated several other themes, demonstrating the need for culturally sensitive approaches. Applying our findings to the World Health Organisation's Three C Model of vaccine hesitancy, the "confidence" dimension appears to represent a disproportionately large barrier to vaccine uptake in ethnic minority groups. Indeed, nuanced adaptations of the model may be necessary to explain vaccine hesitancy in those groups. Further research is required to explore factors facilitating vaccine uptake to monitor changes in hesitancy over time.

Scale Development for COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy by Integration of Socio-Demographic and Psychological Factors

Vaccination is the most cost-effective way to maintain population health. However, it can only be effective if widespread acceptance is held. The efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines depends on their favor. When countries start to vaccinate their citizens, there is a certain level of skepticism about the effectiveness of the vaccines. The hesitancy study on vaccines has gained momentum following the pandemic. However, few studies have examined the link between the psychological and sociodemographic factors influencing the fit. This paper proposes integrating the concepts of the information systems success and stimulus-organism-response into a cognitive fit theory framework to explore the integration of psychological and sociodemographic factors in the receivers' reactions (n = 1510). This study analyses the factors that influence the hesitancy of vaccines and the public's refusal in Asia and Europe. Receivers' reactions were assessed to various stimuli and we explored the link between psychological and sociodemographic elements and the concept of fit. Two surveys were conducted following the scale development of Mackenzie. The first was to develop the fit scale, while the second was to validate the fit scale. The results of the second survey were analyzed using structural equation modelling. The results indicate that the scale's fit development is valid and reliable. The quality of the vaccine information, the psychological characteristics of the vaccine system, and vaccine receivers' satisfaction are also beneficial factors for emotional and cognitive fit. Maintaining the vaccines' quality and efficiency can help improve the fit between sociodemographic and psychological characteristics. It can also enhance receivers' satisfaction and encourage continued vaccine administration. This study is regarded as one of the first to examine and develop an emotional and cognitive fit scale for practitioners and researchers.

Using Digital Technology to Build COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence: A Qualitative Study among Latinx Parents of Children Aged 5-11 in Under-Resourced Communities across Los Angeles County

Background: Latinx school-aged children are more than twice as likely to be infected with and die from COVID-19 as non-Latinx White children in Los Angeles. Although COVID-19 vaccination has the potential to mitigate health disparities exacerbated by the pandemic, vaccination uptake among Latinx children remains limited. MiVacunaLA (MVLA) is a mobile-phone-delivered digital intervention that improved vaccination rates in 12- to 17-year-old Latinx children and parental intention to vaccinate 2- to 11-year-old children. Since piloting MVLA, the COVID-19 vaccine became available to children aged 5-11. We sought to understand parental experiences with the MVLA intervention and their attitudes and beliefs about vaccinating their young children to improve vaccination confidence in the Latinx community. Methods: We conducted six virtual focus groups with 47 parents/caregivers of children aged 5-11 who participated in the MVLA intervention. We used standard qualitative content analysis methods and rigid and accelerated data reduction to identify and analyze major themes discussed in the sessions. Results: Each salient theme from our focus groups was mapped to one of the 5Cs constructs. The themes included the parents' need for more contemplation about vaccinating their children than about vaccinating themselves; the parents' need for trusted sources of vaccine information; the parents' motivations to vaccinate their children against COVID-19; parental concern about short- and long-term effects of the vaccine in children; digital technology and videos as useful engagement tools; and age and health stratification as an approach to parental vaccination decision-making. Conclusions: The results of this study clarify the key factors that influence the decision of Latinx parents and caregivers to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. Our findings can inform efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates among children in underserved Latinx communities, especially regarding the use of digital technologies for promoting vaccine confidence.

COVID-19 vaccine deliberation in individuals directly impacted by incarceration

Delays in vaccinating communities of color to COVID-19 have signaled a need to investigate structural barriers to vaccine uptake, with mass incarceration demanding greater characterization as a potential factor. In a nationally representative survey from February-March 2021 (N = 1,157), exposure to the criminal legal system, defined as having been incarcerated in prison or jail or having had a family member or close friend incarcerated, was associated with higher odds for COVID-19 vaccine deliberation. Individuals with criminal legal system exposure reported lower confidence in physician recommendation as a reason to get vaccinated. They were also more likely to decline vaccination out of fear it would cause COVID-19 infection, and that the vaccine might be promoted as a political tool. Our analysis suggests that populations impacted by the criminal legal system would benefit from targeted vaccine outreach by trusted community members who can address distrust during current and future pandemics.

COVID-19 vaccination dynamics in the US: coverage velocity and carrying capacity based on socio-demographic vulnerability indices in California's pediatric population

Introduction

COVID-19 vaccine inequities have been widespread across California, the United States, and globally. As COVID-19 vaccine inequities have not been fully understood in the youth population, it is vital to determine possible factors that drive inequities to enable actionable change that promotes vaccine equity among vulnerable minor populations.

Methods

The present study used the social vulnerability index (SVI) and daily vaccination numbers within the age groups of 12-17, 5-11, and under 5 years old across all 58 California counties to model the growth velocity and the anticipated maximum proportion of population vaccinated.

Results

Overall, highly vulnerable counties, when compared to low and moderately vulnerable counties, experienced a lower vaccination rate in the 12-17 and 5-11 year-old age groups. For age groups 5-11 and under 5 years old, highly vulnerable counties are expected to achieve a lower overall total proportion of residents vaccinated. In highly vulnerable counties in terms of socioeconomic status and household composition and disability, the 12-17 and 5-11 year-old age groups experienced lower vaccination rates. Additionally, in the 12-17 age group, high vulnerability counties are expected to achieve a higher proportion of residents vaccinated compared to less vulnerable counterparts.

Discussion

These findings elucidate shortcomings in vaccine uptake in certain pediatric populations across California and may help guide health policies and future allocation of vaccines, with special emphasis placed on vulnerable populations, especially with respect to socioeconomic status and household composition and disability.

Factors Influencing the Intention and Uptake of COVID-19 Vaccines on the African Continent: A Scoping Review

The COVID-19 pandemic is a severe concern worldwide, particularly in Africa. Vaccines are crucial in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. This scoping review examined existing literature from 2020 to 2022 on individual, interpersonal, and structural barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination within Africa to facilitate more informed health promotion interventions to improve vaccine uptake. This review was conducted using Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage methodological framework. A comprehensive search was undertaken from 2021 to 2022 using six electronic databases: EBSCOhost, PubMed, Web of Science, ProQuest, WorldCat Discovery, and Google Scholar. Data was collected, charted into themes, and summarized using a standard data extraction sheet in Microsoft Excel. A total of forty (n = 40) published academic articles were reviewed, with many conducted in Nigeria (n = 10), followed by Ethiopia (n = 5) and Ghana (n = 4) and the rest elsewhere in Africa. Thematic narratives were used to report data into six themes: attitudes and perceptions about COVID-19 vaccines, intention to uptake COVID-19 vaccines; factors and barriers associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake; socio-demographic determinants affecting the intention and uptake; and information sources for COVID-19 vaccines. The intention for uptake ranged from 25% to 80.9%, resulting in a suboptimal uptake intention rate (54.2%) on the African continent. Factors that promoted vaccine acceptance included confidence in the COVID-19 vaccines and the desire to protect people. Age, education, and gender were the most common factors significantly associated with vaccine acceptance. Most studies revealed that considerable barriers to vaccine uptake exist in Africa. Concerns about potential side effects, vaccine ineffectiveness, a perceived lack of information, and inaccessibility were among the individual, interpersonal, and structural barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake. The unwillingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was strongly correlated with being female. Mass and social media were the main sources of information regarding COVID-19 vaccines. To encourage vaccine uptake, governments should pay attention to refuting misinformation through integrated community-based approaches, such as creating messages that convey more than just information.

Ethical considerations of the vaccine development process and vaccination: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Various vaccines have been developed and distributed worldwide to control and cope with COVID-19 disease. To ensure vaccines benefit the global community, the ethical principles of beneficence, justice, non-maleficence, and autonomy should be examined and adhered to in the process of development, distribution, and implementation. This study, therefore, aimed to examine ethical considerations of vaccine development and vaccination processes.

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature was conducted based on the Arkesy and O'Malley protocol to identify eligible studies published until November 2021. We searched Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and SciELO databases. The search was conducted using combinations of Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) search terms and keywords for Ethics, COVID-19, and vaccines in abstract, keywords, and title fields to retrieve potentially relevant publications. We included any study that reported one of the four principles of medical ethics: autonomy, justice, non-maleficence, and beneficence in the COVID-19 vaccine development and distribution and implementation of vaccinations. Letters, notes, protocols, and brief communications were excluded. In addition, we searched gray literature to include relevant studies (ProQuest database, conferences, and reports). Data were analyzed using framework analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 43 studies were included. Ethical considerations concluded two themes: (1) production and (2) distribution and vaccination. The production process consisted of 16 codes and 4 main Categories, distribution and vaccination process consisted of 12 codes and 4 main Categories. Moreover, the ethical considerations of special groups were divided into four main groups: health care workers (HCWs) (five codes), children and adolescents (five codes), the elderly (one code), and ethnic and racial minorities (three codes).

CONCLUSION

Due to the externalities of pandemics and the public and social benefits and harms of vaccination, it is not feasible to adhere to all four principles of medical ethics simultaneously and perfectly. This issue confronts individuals and policymakers with several moral dilemmas. It seems that decision-making based on the balance between social benefit and social harm is a better criterion in this regard, and the final decision should be made based on maximizing the public benefit and minimizing the public harm.

The Role of Anti-Racist Community-Partnered Praxis in Implementing Restorative Circles Within Marginalized Communities in Southern California During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the adverse influence of structural racism and discrimination experienced by historically marginalized communities (e.g., Black, Latino/a/x, Indigenous, and transgender people). Structural racism contributes to trauma-induced health behaviors, increasing exposure to COVID-19 and restricting access to testing and vaccination. This intersection of multiple disadvantages has a negative impact on the mental health of these communities, and interventions addressing collective healing are needed in general and in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Share, Trust, Organize, and Partner COVID-19 California Alliance (STOP COVID-19 CA), a statewide collaborative of 11 universities and 75 community partners, includes several workgroups to address gaps in COVID-19 information, vaccine trial participation, and access. One of these workgroups, the Vaccine Hesitancy Workgroup, adopted an anti-racist community-partnered praxis to implement restorative circles in historically marginalized communities to facilitate collective healing due to structural racism and the COVID-19 pandemic. The project resulted in the development of a multilevel pre-intervention restorative process to build or strengthen community-institutional partnerships when procurement of funds has been sought prior to community partnership. This article discusses this workgroup's role in advancing health justice by providing a community-based mental health intervention to marginalized communities in Southern California while using an antiracist praxis tool to develop a successful community-institutional partnership and to live up to the vision of community-based participatory research.

Community-Based Public Health Vaccination Campaign (VaccinateLA) in Los Angeles' Black and Latino Communities: Protocol for a Participatory Study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected Los Angeles County and disproportionately impacted Black and Latino populations who experienced disparities in rates of infection, hospitalizations, morbidity, and mortality. The University of Southern California (USC), USC Keck School of Medicine, Southern California Clinical and Translational Science Institute, USC Mann School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Annenberg School for Journalism and Communication, and Children's Hospital Los Angeles will launch a collaborative public health campaign called VaccinateLA.

OBJECTIVE

VaccinateLA will implement a community-based, community-partnered public health campaign that (1) delivers culturally tailored information about COVID-19 and available vaccines; and (2) addresses misinformation and disinformation, which serves as a barrier to vaccine uptake. The campaign will be targeted to communities in Los Angeles with the highest rates of COVID-19 infection and the lowest vaccination rates. Using these criteria, the campaign will be targeted to neighborhoods located in 34 zip codes in the Eastside and South Los Angeles. The primary aim of VaccinateLA will be to design and deliver an evidence-based multimedia public health campaign tailored for Black and Latino populations. A secondary aim will be to train and deploy community vaccine navigators to deliver COVID-19 education, help individuals overcome barriers to getting vaccinated (eg, transportation and challenges registering), and assist with delivering vaccinations in our targeted communities.

METHODS

We will use a community-based, participatory research approach to shape VaccinateLA's public health campaign to address community members' attitudes and concerns in developing campaign content. We will conduct focus groups, establish a community advisory board, and engage local leaders and stakeholders to develop and implement a broad array of educational, multimedia, and field-based activities.

RESULTS

As of February 2023, target communities have been identified. The activities will be initiated and evaluated over the course of this year-long initiative, and dissemination will occur following the completion of the project.

CONCLUSIONS

Engaging the community is vital to developing culturally tailored public health messages that will resonate with intended audiences. VaccinateLA will serve as a model for how an academic institution can quickly mobilize to address a pressing public health crisis, particularly in underrepresented and underresourced communities. Our work has important implications for future public health campaigns. By leveraging community partnerships and deploying community health workers or promotores into the community, we hope to demonstrate that urban universities can successfully partner with local communities to develop and deliver a range of culturally tailored educational, multimedia, and field-based activities, which in turn may change the course of an urgent public health crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/40161.

"Community members have more impact on their neighbors than celebrities": leveraging community partnerships to build COVID-19 vaccine confidence

BACKGROUND

Vaccines are a strong public health tool to protect against severe disease, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19. Still, inequities in COVID-19 vaccination rates and health outcomes continue to exist among Black and Latino populations. Boston Medical Center (BMC) has played a significant role in vaccinating medically underserved populations, and organized a series of community-engaged conversations to better understand community concerns regarding the COVID-19 vaccine. This paper describes the themes which resulted from these community-engaged conversations and proposes next steps for healthcare leaders.

METHODS

We accessed nine publicly available recordings of the community-engaged conversations which were held between March 2021 and September 2021 and ranged from 8 to 122 attendees. Six conversations prioritized specific groups: the Haitian-Creole community, the Cape Verdean community, the Latino community, the Black Christian Faith community, guardians who care for children living with disabilities, and individuals affected by systemic lupus erythematosus. Remaining conversations targeted the general public of the Greater Boston Area. We employed a Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-driven codebook to code our data. Our analysis utilized a modified version of qualitative rapid analysis methods.

RESULTS

Five main themes emerged from these community-engaged conversations: (1) Structural factors are important barriers to COVID-19 vaccination; (2) Mistrust exists due to the negative impact of systemic oppression and perceived motivation of the government; (3) There is a desire to learn more about biological and clinical characteristics of the COVID-19 vaccine as well as the practical implications of being vaccinated; (4) Community leaders emphasize community engagement for delivering COVID-19 information and education and; (5) Community leaders believe that the COVID-19 vaccine is a solution to address the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

This study illustrates a need for community-engaged COVID-19 vaccine messaging which reflects the nuances of the COVID-19 vaccine and pandemic without oversimplifying information. In highlighting common concerns of the Greater Boston Area which contribute to a lack of confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine, we underscore important considerations for public health and healthcare leadership in the development of initiatives which work to advance health equity.

Understanding COVID-19 Risk Perceptions and Precautionary Behaviors in Black Chicagoans: A Grounded Theory Approach

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether actual community-level risk for COVID-19 in the Black community influenced individual perceptions of community-level and personal risk and how self-assessment of personal risk was reflected in the adoption of COVID-19 precautionary behaviors.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 Black Chicago adults from February to July 2021. A grounded theory approach was used for the qualitative analysis and initial, focused, and theoretical coding were performed.

RESULTS

We developed a grounded model consisting of four major themes: (a) Pre-Existing Health Conditions; (b) Presence of COVID-19 Infection in Participant Social Network; (c) COVID-19-Related Information, Participant Trust, and Perceived Personal Risk; and (d) Perceived Higher Burden of COVID-19 in the Black Community.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher perceptions of personal risk were shaped by pre-existing health conditions and experiences with COVID-19 in one's social network but were not influenced by perceived higher burden of COVID-19 in the Black community.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Black adults' perceptions of their individual risk and precautionary behaviors were not congruent with public health data and recommendations. Therefore, COVID-19 messaging and mitigation should be informed by local community engagement and transparent communication.

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.

Attitudes toward COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake: A Qualitative Study of Mostly Immigrant Racial/Ethnic Minority Older Adults

(1) Background: Few qualitative studies address diverse older adults' perceptions of COVID-19 vaccination in the United States, including non-English speakers and immigrant populations. This study aims to understand the attitudes of diverse, primarily immigrant older adults in the U.S. toward the COVID-19 vaccine and its influences on their vaccination decision-making. (2) Methods: The research team conducted semi-structured interviews (N = 100) in 2021 focused on understanding ethnically/racially diverse older adults' perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine. Interviews were recorded, coded, and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. (3) Results: Thematic analyses identified three themes. (1) Older adults showed mixed attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine associated with information consumed and trust in healthcare systems; (2) health concerns and underlying medical conditions were the most influential factors of vaccine uptake; and (3) systemic barriers and trusted figures impacted vaccination decision-making of older adults. (4) Conclusions: Accessible information in diverse languages tailored to the community's fears is needed to combat vaccine mistrust. Vaccine rollout programs need to tackle the fear of vaccine side effects. Attitudes of religious leaders, family members, and physicians considerably influenced vaccine uptake, suggesting their role as trusted members for vaccine messaging for older, primarily immigrant adults. Systemic barriers, namely lack of transportation and inaccessible vaccination sites, contributed to vaccine deterrence.

Barriers and Enablers to COVID-19 Vaccination in San Francisco's Spanish-Speaking Population

Populations at high risk for COVID-19- including Spanish speakers-may face additional barriers to obtaining COVID-19 vaccinations; by understanding their challenges, we can create more equitable vaccine interventions. In this study, we used interviews to identify barriers and enablers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake among participants in the San Francisco Department of Public Health contact tracing program. Data analysis employed Capability, Opportunity, Motivation Behavior model (COM-B) and the Behavior Change Wheel framework as guides to target barriers with interventions and supporting policies. This paper presents data from interviews focused on COVID-19 vaccine uptake that was part of a project to improve COVID-19 preventive behaviors in San Francisco. We completed seventeen interviews between February and May 2021; six (35%) were completed in English and 11 (65%) in Spanish. Barriers to vaccine uptake included an unprepared health system, fear of side effects, limited knowledge, and conflicting information. Behavioral factors influencing vaccine uptake were mainly related to physical opportunity, automatic motivation, and psychological capability. Interventions that could address the most significant number of barriers included education, enablement, and environmental restructuring. Finally, communication and marketing policies that use diverse multi-lingual social media and environmental planning that includes accessible vaccine sites for people with disabilities, literacy barriers, and limited English proficiency could significantly increase vaccination. Public health departments should tailor interventions to high-risk populations by understanding the specific barriers they face. This exploratory study suggests how implementation science can provide frameworks to achieve this.

Evaluation of the Community Health Worker Model for COVID-19 Response and Recovery

Community health workers (CHWs), or promotores de salud, have long played a role in health promotion, but the COVID-19 pandemic has brought renewed attention to the functions, sustainability, and financing of CHW models. ¡Andale! ¿Que Esperas? was a 12-month (June 2021-May 2022) campaign that expanded the CHW workforce to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates in structurally vulnerable, Latinx communities across California. This mixed-methods evaluation aims to elucidate (1) the role of CHWs in COVID-19 response, recovery, and rebuilding and (2) the importance, needs, and perils of CHW models in the COVID-19 era and beyond. CHWs facilitated 159,074 vaccinations and vaccine appointments by countering mis/disinformation, addressing mental health and social needs, building digital competencies, and meeting people where they are, all of which expanded access and instilled confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine. CHWs' success in engaging the community lies in their shared lived experience as well as their accessibility and recognition in the community, enabling their role in both immediate response and long-term recovery. Funding instability imperils the advances made by CHWs, and efforts are needed to institutionalize the CHW workforce with sustainable funding models. While Medicaid reimbursement models exist in some states, these models are often limited to healthcare services, overlooking a critical function of the CHW model: building community resilience and mobilizing the community for social change.

Examining Black and Hispanic physicians and other healthcare providers' attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine

OBJECTIVES

Recognizing that the voice delivering the message is as important as the information being shared, we examined vaccine perceptions and willingness to encourage patients to obtain COVID-19 vaccinations among Black and Hispanic healthcare providers.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional, online survey of Black and Hispanic healthcare providers who were members of the National Medical Association (NMA), National Hispanic Medical Association (NHMA), and National Pharmaceutical Association (NPhA) between January 11 - March 3, 2021, shortly after emergency use authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. Three multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine factors associated with the willingness to encourage COVID-19 vaccination.

RESULTS

The analytic sample consisted of 542 fully completed surveys. Pharmacists reported intent to take the vaccine (75.0% "as soon as you can" vs 91.4% for MD/DOs; p<0.001) and encouraged patients to get vaccinated (78.6% vs 91.0% for MD/DOs; p = 0.01). Providers in a suburban practice location were less likely to recommend vaccines to patients (OR=0.43, 95%CI: 0.22-0.87) and personal family (OR=0.45, 95%CI: 0.22-0.92) compared to those practicing in urban areas. Providers over age 45 were also more likely to report intent to take the vaccine themselves as soon as it was available (OR=3.72, 95%CI: 1.30-10.64).

CONCLUSIONS

This is likely the first cross-sectional study in the United States demonstrating the substantial vaccine confidence among Black and Hispanic healthcare providers who serve minoritized communities that have borne the greatest risk of adverse COVID-related outcomes.

COVID-19 Booster Dose Vaccination Coverage and Factors Associated with Booster Vaccination among Adults, United States, March 2022

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose for all persons >18 years of age. We analyzed data from the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module collected during February 27-March 26, 2022 to assess COVID-19 booster dose vaccination coverage among adults. We used multivariable logistic regression analysis to assess factors associated with vaccination. COVID-19 booster dose coverage among fully vaccinated adults increased from 25.7% in November 2021 to 63.4% in March 2022. Coverage was lower among non-Hispanic Black (52.7%), and Hispanic (55.5%) than non-Hispanic White adults (67.7%). Coverage was 67.4% among essential healthcare personnel, 62.2% among adults who had a disability, and 69.9% among adults who had medical conditions. Booster dose coverage was not optimal, and disparities by race/ethnicity and other factors are apparent in coverage uptake. Tailored strategies are needed to educate the public and reduce disparities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage.

Inclusionary Trials: A Review of Lessons Not Learned

The COVID-19 pandemic revealed weaknesses in the public health infrastructure of the United States, including persistent barriers to engaging marginalized communities toward inclusion in clinical research, including trials. Inclusive participation in clinical trials is crucial for promoting vaccine confidence, public trust, and addressing disparate health outcomes. A long-standing body of literature describes the value of community-based participatory research in increasing marginalized community participation in research. Community-based participatory research emphasizes shared leadership with community members in all phases of the research process, including in the planning and implementation, interpretation, and dissemination. Shared leadership between academic and industry with marginalized communities can assist with inclusive participation in vaccine trials and increase public trust in the development of the vaccines and other therapies used during public emergencies. Nevertheless, epidemiologic and clinical research do not yet have a strong culture of community partnership in the scientific process, which takes time to build and therefore may be difficult to develop and rapidly scale to respond to the pandemic. We outline practices that contribute to a lack of inclusive participation and suggest steps that trialists and other researchers can take to increase marginalized communities' participation in research. Practices include planning for community engagement during the planning and recruitment phases, having regular dialogues with communities about their priorities, supporting them throughout a study, and navigating complex structural determinants of health. Additionally, we discuss how research institutions can support inclusive practices by reexamining their policies to increase participation in clinical trials and instilling institutional trustworthiness.