Have vaccine hesitancy models oversimplified a complex problem to our detriment? The Adapted Royal Society of Canada vaccine uptake framework

Connect, collaborate and tailor: a model of community engagement through infographic design during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Across the globe, racial and ethnic minorities have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 with increased risk of infection and burden from disease. Vaccine hesitancy has contributed to variation in vaccine uptake and compromised population-based vaccination programs in many countries. Connect, Collaborate and Tailor (CCT) is a Public Health Agency of Canada funded project to make new connections between public health, healthcare professionals and underserved communities in order to create culturally adapted communication about COVID-19 vaccines. This paper describes the CCT process and outcomes as a community engagement model that identified information gaps and created tailored tools to address misinformation and improve vaccine acceptance.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with CCT participants were undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of CCT in identifying and addressing topics of concern to underserved and ethnic minority communities. Interviews also explored CCT participants' experiences of collaboration through the development of new partnerships between ethnic minority communities, public health and academic researchers, and the evolution of co-operation sharing ideas and creating infographics. Thematic analysis was used to produce representative themes. The activities described were aligned with the levels of public engagement described in the IAP2 spectrum (International Association for Public Participation).

RESULTS

Analysis of interviews (n = 14) revealed that shared purpose and urgency in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic motivated co-operation among CCT participants. Acknowledgement of past harm, present health, and impact of social inequities on public service access was an essential first step in establishing trust. Creating safe spaces for open dialogue led to successful, iterative cycles of consultation and feedback between participants; a process that not only helped create tailored infographics but also deepened engagement and collaboration. Over time, the infographic material development was increasingly directed by community representatives' commentary on their groups' real-time needs and communication preferences. This feedback noticeably guided the choice, style, and presentation of infographic content while also directing dissemination strategies and vaccine confidence building activities.

CONCLUSIONS

The CCT process to create COVID-19 vaccine communication materials led to evolving co-operation between groups who had not routinely worked together before; strong community engagement was a key driver of change. Ensuring a respectful environment for open dialogue and visibly using feedback to create information products provided a foundation for building relationships. Finally, our data indicate participants sought reinforcement of close cooperative ties and continued investment in shared responsibility for community partnership-based public health.

COVID-19 vaccination of at-risk and marginalised groups: recentering the state in vaccine uptake

Recent studies have used the World Health Organization's new Behavioural and Social Drivers (BeSD) framework to analyse vaccine uptake. However, this study of COVID-19 vaccination among marginalised population groups highlights the framework's limitations regarding the centrality of the state in shaping people's vaccination intentions in high income countries. We conducted interviews and focus groups with service providers and community members to explore COVID-19 vaccination amongst Western Australians experiencing homelessness and/or from other marginalised populations (such as people with substance use dependence). Analysing this data iteratively to emphasise the state's role and functions, we elaborate how trauma and mistrust of government drive thoughts, feelings, and social interactions regarding vaccination programs, which are mutually reinforcing and which inhibit individuals' willingness to engage. Government systems that leave some populations behind increase those populations' susceptibility to misinformation. Policies may generate new unintended problems: social service providers worried about vaccine advocacy damaging clients' trust, especially in the context of vaccine mandates. Reframing the state's responsibility for designing culturally and socially appropriate services, we outline how end-users and trusted providers can lead this process. We share a new framework, "Recentering the State in Vaccine Uptake," arising from our analyses.

Digital Gamification Tools to Enhance Vaccine Uptake: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Gamification has been used successfully to promote various desired health behaviors. Previous studies have used gamification to achieve desired health behaviors or facilitate their learning about health.

OBJECTIVE

In this scoping review, we aimed to describe digital gamified tools that have been implemented or evaluated across various populations to encourage vaccination, as well as any reported effects of identified tools.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, the Web of Science Core Collection, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Academic Search Premier, PsycInfo, Global Health, and ERIC for peer-reviewed papers describing digital gamified tools with or without evaluations. We also conducted web searches with Google to identify digital gamified tools lacking associated publications. We consulted 12 experts in the field of gamification and health behavior to identify any papers or tools we might have missed. We extracted data about the target population of the tools, the interventions themselves (eg, type of digital gamified tool platform, type of disease/vaccine, type and design of study), and any effects of evaluated tools, and we synthesized data narratively.

RESULTS

Of 1402 records, we included 28 (2%) peer-reviewed papers and 10 digital gamified tools lacking associated publications. The experts added 1 digital gamified tool that met the inclusion criteria. Our final data set therefore included 28 peer-reviewed papers and 11 digital gamified tools. Of the 28 peer-reviewed papers, 7 (25%) explained the development of the tool, 16 (57%) described evaluation, and 2 (7%) reported both development and evaluation of the tool. The 28 peer-reviewed papers reported on 25 different tools. Of these 25 digital gamified tools, 11 (44%) were web-based tools, 8 (32%) mobile (native mobile or mobile-enabled web) apps, and 6 (24%) virtual reality tools. Overall, tools that were evaluated showed increases in knowledge and intentions to receive vaccines, mixed effects on attitudes, and positive effects on beliefs. We did not observe discernible advantages of one type of digital gamified tool (web based, mobile, virtual reality) over the others. However, a few studies were randomized controlled trials, and publication bias may have led to such positive effects having a higher likelihood of appearing in the peer-reviewed literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital gamified tools appear to have potential for improving vaccine uptake by fostering positive beliefs and increasing vaccine-related knowledge and intentions. Encouraging comparative studies of different features or different types of digital gamified tools could advance the field by identifying features or types of tools that yield more positive effects across populations and contexts. Further work in this area should seek to inform the implementation of gamification for vaccine acceptance and promote effective health communication, thus yielding meaningful health and social impacts.

A New Paradigm for Pandemic Preparedness

Purpose of Review

Preparing for pandemics requires a degree of interdisciplinary work that is challenging under the current paradigm. This review summarizes the challenges faced by the field of pandemic science and proposes how to address them.

Recent Findings

The structure of current siloed systems of research organizations hinders effective interdisciplinary pandemic research. Moreover, effective pandemic preparedness requires stakeholders in public policy and health to interact and integrate new findings rapidly, relying on a robust, responsive, and productive research domain. Neither of these requirements are well supported under the current system.

Summary

We propose a new paradigm for pandemic preparedness wherein interdisciplinary research and close collaboration with public policy and health practitioners can improve our ability to prevent, detect, and treat pandemics through tighter integration among domains, rapid and accurate integration, and translation of science to public policy, outreach and education, and improved venues and incentives for sustainable and robust interdisciplinary work.

Effective Vaccination and Education Strategies for Emerging Infectious Diseases Such as COVID-19

Social isolation and control owing to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are easing; however, concerns regarding new infectious diseases have not disappeared. Given epidemic experiences such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), the influenza pandemic, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and COVID-19, it is necessary to prepare for the outbreak of new infectious diseases and situations in which large-scale vaccinations are required. Although the development of vaccines against COVID-19 has contributed greatly to overcoming the pandemic, concerning vaccine side effects from the general public, including medical personnel, and decreased confidence in vaccine efficacy and side effects, present many challenges in promoting and educating vaccinations for new infectious diseases in the future. In addition to plans to develop vaccines for the outbreak of new infectious diseases, education and promotion plans are necessary to administer the latest developments of vaccines to the general public. Moreover, efforts are needed to secure the necessity, legitimacy, and evidence for rapid vaccination on a large scale at the national level. It is also necessary to carefully prepare scientific bases and explanatory statements so that the general public can easily understand them. This study aimed to establish vaccine strategies and vaccination education plans for new infectious diseases that may occur in the future. Many ways to promote vaccination to the general public and healthcare workers should be prepared to ensure that the latest vaccines against new infectious diseases are administered safely. Thus, education and promotion of vaccine efficacy and safety based on specific data from clinical studies are necessary.

How to increase and maintain high immunization coverage: Vaccination Demand Resilience (VDR) framework

BACKGROUND

Resilience in vaccination demand is ever more critical as the COVID-19 pandemic has increased our understanding of the importance of vaccines on health and well-being. Yet timid demand for COVID-19 vaccines where available and reduced uptake of routine immunizations globally further raise the urgent need to build vaccination resilience. We demonstrate the complexity of vaccination demand and resilience in a framework where relevant dimensions are intertwined, fluid, and contextual.

METHODS

We developed the Vaccination Demand Resilience (VDR) framework based on a literature review on vaccination demand and expert consultation. The matrix framework builds on three main axes: 1) vaccination attitudes and beliefs; 2) vaccination seeking behavior; and 3) vaccination status. The matrix generated eight quadrants, which can help explain people's levels of vaccination demand and resilience. We selected four scenarios as examples to demonstrate different interventions that could move people across quadrants and build vaccination resilience.

RESULTS

Incongruence between individuals' attitudes and beliefs, vaccination behavior, and vaccination status can arise. For example, an individual can be vaccinated due to mandates but reject vaccination benefits and otherwise avoid seeking vaccination. Such incongruence could be altered by interventions to build resilience in vaccination demand. These interventions include information, education and communication to change individuals' vaccination attitudes and beliefs, incentive programs and reminder-recalls to facilitate vaccination seeking, or by strengthening healthcare provider communications to reduce missed opportunities.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination decision-making is complex. Individuals can be vaccinated without necessarily accepting the benefits of vaccination or seeking vaccination, threatening resilience in vaccination demand. The VDR framework can provide a useful lens for program managers and policy makers considering interventions and policies to improve vaccination resilience. This would help build and sustain confidence and demand for vaccinations, and help to continue to prevent disease, disability, and death from vaccine-preventable diseases.

'I'm provax': Pro-vaccination personal histories and socialities of older Australians in the COVID-19 pandemic

Vaccination scholarship often explores how social networks foster vaccine refusal and delay, revealing how social and institutional relations produce refusing or delaying parents and un- or under-vaccinated children. It is likewise critical to understand the development of pro-vaccination orientations by researching those who want to be vaccinated since such attitudes and associated practices underpin successful vaccination programmes. This article explores pro-vaccination sociality, personal histories and self-understandings during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia. We draw upon 18 in-depth interviews with older Western Australians, documenting how they articulate 'provax' identities in opposition to those they depict as 'antivax' others. Provax identities were clearly anchored in and solidified through social relations and personal histories, as interviewees spoke of 'likeminded' friends and families who facilitated each other's vaccinations and referenced childhood experiences of epidemics and vaccinations. Access barriers relating to the vaccine programme drove interviewees to reimagine their provax status in light of not yet being vaccinated. Thus, interviewees' moral and ideological understandings of themselves and others were interrelated with supply-side constraints. We examine the development of self-proclaimed 'provaxxers' (in a context of limited access); how they imagine and enact boundaries between themselves and those they deem 'antivax'; and possibilities for public health research.

State of Vaccine Hesitancy in the United States

Although the term "vaccine hesitancy" has achieved great prominence, the extent to which US parents have reluctance, doubts, or indecision when it comes to vaccines recommended for children and how such hesitancy is manifest are unclear. A narrative review approach that placed emphasis on recent data and published work is used to surface evidence and insights into the current state of US parent vaccine hesitancy. The assessment finds evidence that ∼6% to 25% of parents may be vaccine hesitant, that hesitancy is higher for influenza and HPV vaccines, and there are indications that addressing parent hesitancy has become more challenging.

Towards a sense of urgency for innovation realization: a case study on complacency asymmetries in interorganizational relations

This paper seeks to explore the concept of complacency as a barrier to the sense of urgency within product innovation, by investigating the concept on behalf of interfirm project partners. More specifically, the study aims to understand complacency within the context of an industrial research project in Norway subject to material substitution of an energy transmission tower. As such, the study seeks to give a contextual understanding of complacency for innovation realization (e.g., innovation speed) from a single case study. The study identified different complacency mechanism asymmetries on behalf of the actors, as well as the varying reasons (drivers) to why urgency gaps may occur among actors. The urgency gaps were found to impact a sense of urgency and thus innovation speed negatively. The asymmetries are presented from the drivers: role understanding, competence, project intent, risk and trust. Moreover, the urgency gaps' implications for interorganizational project collaboration, and how they contribute to theory on industrial product innovation, are explained. The findings contribute with new insights on important mechanisms for how a sense of urgency may be enhanced in research projects subject to interorganizational innovation. Theoretical contributions thus relate to enhanced understanding of complacency asymmetry in product innovation collaboration, and how trust is an important dimension for urgency creation.

A systematic review of communication interventions for countering vaccine misinformation

BACKGROUND

Misinformation and disinformation around vaccines has grown in recent years, exacerbated during the Covid-19 pandemic. Effective strategies for countering vaccine misinformation and disinformation are crucial for tackling vaccine hesitancy. We conducted a systematic review to identify and describe communications-based strategies used to prevent and ameliorate the effect of mis- and dis-information on people's attitudes and behaviours surrounding vaccination (objective 1) and examined their effectiveness (objective 2).

METHODS

We searched CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and MedRxiv in March 2021. The search strategy was built around three themes(1) communications and media; (2) misinformation; and (3) vaccines. For trials addressing objective 2, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias in randomized trials tool (RoB2).

RESULTS

Of 2000 identified records, 34 eligible studies addressed objective 1, 29 of which also addressed objective 2 (25 RCTs and 4 before-and-after studies). Nine 'intervention approaches' were identified; most focused on content of the intervention or message (debunking/correctional, informational, use of disease images or other 'scare tactics', use of humour, message intensity, inclusion of misinformation warnings, and communicating weight of evidence), while two focused on delivery of the intervention or message (timing and source). Some strategies, such as scare tactics, appear to be ineffective and may increase misinformation endorsement. Communicating with certainty, rather than acknowledging uncertainty around vaccine efficacy or risks, was also found to backfire. Promising approaches include communicating the weight-of-evidence and scientific consensus around vaccines and related myths, using humour and incorporating warnings about encountering misinformation. Trying to debunk misinformation, informational approaches, and communicating uncertainty had mixed results.

CONCLUSION

This review identifies some promising communication strategies for addressing vaccine misinformation. Interventions should be further evaluated by measuring effects on vaccine uptake, rather than distal outcomes such as knowledge and attitudes, in quasi-experimental and real-life contexts.

Vaccines, Politics and Mandates: Can We See the Forest for the Trees? Comment on "Convergence on Coercion: Functional and Political Pressures as Drivers of Global Childhood Vaccine Mandates"

Under-vaccination is a complex problem that is not simple to address whether this is for routine childhood immunization or for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. Vaccination mandates has been one policy instrument used to try to increase vaccine uptake. While the concept may appear straight forward there is no standard approach. The decision to shift to a more coercive mandated program may be influenced by both functional and/or political needs. With mandates there may be patient and/or public push back. Anti-mandate protests and increased public polarization has been seen with COVID-19 vaccine mandates. This may negatively impact on vaccine acceptance ie, be counterproductive, causing more harm than overall good in the longer term. We need a better understanding of the political and functional needs that drive policy change towards mandates as well as cases studies of the shorter- and longer-term outcomes of mandates in both routine and pandemic settings.

Vaccine Hesitancy: Contemporary Issues and Historical Background

Vaccination, despite being recognized as one of the most effective primary public health measures, is viewed as unsafe and unnecessary by an increasing number of individuals. Anxiety about vaccines and vaccination programs leading to vaccine hesitancy results from a complex mix of social and political influences, cultural and religious beliefs, the availability of and ability to interpret health and scientific information, and personal and population experiences of health systems and government policies. Vaccine hesitancy is becoming a serious threat to vaccination programs, and was identified as one of the World Health Organization’s top ten global health threats in 2019. The negative impact of anti-vaccination movements is frequently cited as one of the major reasons for rising vaccine hesitancy amongst the general public world-wide. This review discusses the various issues surrounding vaccine hesitancy and the anti-vaccine movement, starting with the definitions of vaccine hesitancy and the anti-vaccine movement in their early history and in the modern era, before discussing the key drivers of vaccine hesitancy, particularly across different regions of the world, with a focus on various countries with low-, middle-, or high-income economies with different socio-economic populations. The review concludes with the impact of vaccine hesitancy on herd immunity and social, psychological, and public health measures to counter vaccine hesitancy.

Understanding the influence of online information, misinformation, disinformation and reinformation on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance: Protocol for a multicomponent study

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated an explosion in the amount of information shared on the internet, including false and misleading information on SARS-CoV-2 and recommended protective behaviors. Prior to the pandemic, web-based misinformation and disinformation were already identified as having an impact on people’s decision to refuse or delay recommended vaccination for themselves or their children.

Objective

The overall aims of our study are to better understand the influence of web-based misinformation and disinformation on COVID-19 vaccine decisions and investigate potential solutions to reduce the impact of web-based misinformation and disinformation about vaccines.

Methods

Based on different research approaches, the study will involve (1) the use of artificial intelligence techniques, (2) a web-based survey, (3) interviews, and (4) a scoping review and an environmental scan of the literature.

Results

As of September 1, 2022, data collection has been completed for all objectives. The analysis is being conducted, and results should be disseminated in the upcoming months.

Conclusions

The findings from this study will help with understanding the underlying determinants of vaccine hesitancy among Canadian individuals and identifying effective, tailored interventions to improve vaccine acceptance among them.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/41012