COVID-19 in Europe: new challenges for addressing vaccine hesitancy

Trust and Support for Cancer Research Biobanks: Insights from Cancer Patients in Poland

BACKGROUND Biobanks are legally regulated entities that acquire, store, prepare, preserve, test, analyze, and distribute defined biological material and related information and data from human sources. This study aimed to evaluate trust, support and willingness to donate personal data and tissue samples for biobanking from cancer patients attending oncology departments in Poznań, Poland. MATERIAL AND METHODS This study utilized data from questionnaire-based survey conducted from February to June 2023 among 548 patients from 2 Poznań hospitals equipped with oncology treatment units. The survey employed convenience sampling. Statistical analysis was carried out using JASP 0.18.3 and PQStat1.8.6., with significance levels set at 0.05. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were utilized to present the results. RESULTS 92.2% of cancer patients supported the establishment of cancer research biobank in Poland, and 93.1% declared the willingness to share their cancer tissues for research purposes. Patients' willingness to donate was associated with biomedical research conducted by biobanks and types of biobank institutions. Most patients were willing to donate for research on cancer, genetic and autoimmune diseases or dementia, but were reluctant to participate in research on sexual identity, intelligence, aggression and for-profit research. Patients were willing to donate to biobanks managed by medical universities, public institutions, clinical hospitals and national biobanks but not to foreign and private biobanks. CONCLUSIONS Although patients' support for cancer biobank is high it is not unconditional as their willingness to participate in cancer-related research is associated with types of biomedical research conducted by biobanks and different types of biobank institutions.

Lived experiences of COVID-19 disease: a qualitative meta-synthesis

Background

During the COVID-19 pandemic, various aspects of human life were changed around the world. The present study aimed to provide a systematic review of the available evidence on lived experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This is a systematic review of the meta-synthesis type. Evidence from studies from 2019 to 2021 was used. Keywords of lived experiences, experiences, people, nation, patients, community, COVID-19, corona, and corona disease were searched in PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to evaluate the quality of articles. A qualitative meta-synthesis was performed by a researcher based on a three-step meta-synthesis method described by Thomas and colleagues. MAXQDA 10 was used for data analysis. The present study is based on the guidelines for Enhancing transparency in reporting the meta-synthesis of qualitative research (ENTREQ). The reliability of this study had a Kappa coefficient of 0.660 with a consistency rate of 98.766%.

Results

Finally, the data from 11 articles were analyzed. The main and sub-themes obtained in this study included negative aspects (chaos, hustle associated, dualities, bad body, value decay, seclusion, psychological challenges) as well as positive aspects (opportunities arising from the individual, family, and social stability).

Conclusion

Problems of life during COVID-19 should be considered as part of the COVID-19 pandemic care program. Individual assessments should normally be considered in a public health crisis. It is recommended to conduct serious, in-depth, and practical research in this field.

Investigating Beliefs in Anti-Vax Conspiracy Theories among Medical Students

While the doctors' role in immunization is essential, their lack of knowledge or vaccine hesitancy may affect their ability to communicate effectively and educate patients about vaccination, vaccine hesitancy, and vaccine conspiracy theories. This, in turn, may hinder health policy aimed at fighting infectious diseases. Vaccine hesitancy is prevalent not only among the general population but also among healthcare workers; thus, this study is aimed at assessing future doctors' attitudes towards anti-vax conspiracy theories. A total of 441 medical students at Poznan University of Medical Sciences completed a web-based survey designed to explore their attitudes toward the six most prevalent anti-vaccine conspiracy theories. The survey showed that although over 97% of future doctors support vaccinations as an effective form of fighting infectious diseases, and 80% did not believe in any anti-vax conspiracy theory, a significant fraction of 20% of medical students either believed in at least one such theory or were unsure. It has also shown that male and younger students who had not received a flu vaccination and defined themselves as politically right-wing or conservative and religious were more likely to believe in anti-vax conspiracy theories. Our data suggest that, in order to overcome medical students' ambivalent attitudes towards anti-vax conspiracy theories, they should receive more education about the importance of vaccination in preventing disease and about effective ways to combat vaccine hesitancy and anti-vax conspiracy theories.

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the pediatric infectious disease landscape

This narrative review aims to present an overview of the COVID-19 pandemic's effects on the landscape of pediatric infectious diseases. While COVID-19 generally results in mild symptoms and a favorable prognosis in children, the pandemic brought forth significant consequences. These included persistent symptoms among infected children ("long COVID"), a profound transformation in healthcare utilization (notably through the widespread adoption of telemedicine), and the implementation of optimization strategies within healthcare settings. Furthermore, the pandemic resulted in alterations in the circulation patterns of respiratory pathogens, including influenza, RSV, and Streptococcus pneumoniae. The possible reasons for those changes are discussed in this review. COVID-19 effect was not limited to respiratory infectious diseases, as other diseases, including urinary tract and gastrointestinal infections, have displayed decreased transmission rates, likely attributable to heightened hygiene measures and shifts in care-seeking behaviors. Finally, the disruption of routine childhood vaccination programs has resulted in reduced immunization coverage and an upsurge in vaccine hesitancy. In addition, the pandemic was associated with issues of antibiotic misuse and over-prescription.     Conclusion: In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic has left a profound and multifaceted impact on the landscape of pediatric infectious diseases, ranging from the emergence of "long COVID" in children to significant changes in healthcare delivery, altered circulation patterns of various pathogens, and concerning disruptions in vaccination programs and antibiotic usage. What is Known: • COVID-19 usually presents with mild symptoms in children, although severe and late manifestations are possible. • The pandemic resulted in a dramatically increased use of health care services, as well as alterations in the circulation patterns of respiratory pathogens, decreased rates of other, non-respiratory, infections, disruption of routine childhood vaccination programs, and antibiotic misuse. What is New: • Possible strategies to tackle future outbreaks are presented, including changes in health care services utilization, implementation of updated vaccine programs and antibiotic stewardship protocols. • The decline in RSV and influenza circulation during COVID-19 was probably not primarily related to NPI measures, and rather related to other, non-NPI measures implementation, including specific pathogen-host interactions on the level of the biological niche (the nasopharynx).

COVID-19 Vaccine Coverage and Factors Associated with Vaccine Hesitancy: A Cross-Sectional Survey in the City of Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo

Vaccination against COVID-19 has been the main strategy used by most countries to limit the spread of the virus. However, vaccine uptake has been low in Africa, leading to the implementation of several interventions in order to improve vaccine coverage. This study was conducted due to the lack of information about COVID-19 vaccine coverage and the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. This cross-sectional study was carried out in Kinshasa city using multi-stage random sampling. A total of 2160 households were included in this study. The data were analyzed using Stata 17 software. The means and standard deviations were computed for continuous data that followed a normal distribution, whereas proportions together with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for categorical variables. The connections between dependent variables and each independent variable were tested using either Pearson's chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. The logistic regression method was employed to determine the factors that are linked to hesitation in obtaining the COVID-19 immunization. The majority of respondents were aged between 25 and 34 and 35 and 49 (28.9%). During this study, 15% (95% CI [13.25-17.9]) of respondents had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. The prevalence of vaccine hesitancy was 67% (CI95%:64.9-69.1). Among the reasons given for refusing to be vaccinated, most respondents cited concerns about the vaccine being unsafe or causing adverse reactions (45%). Among the reasons given for accepting the vaccine, 26% thought that the vaccine prevented superinfection. The factors associated with hesitancy toward the COVID-19 vaccine were female gender, an age of less than 35 years, and living in non-slum households. Despite the interventions implemented across the country, the reluctance to be vaccinated remains a problem; this could lead to poor health outcomes, especially among the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions. It is important to step up awareness-raising campaigns in the community in order to increase the uptake of vaccination.

Uptake of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines in relation to preexisting chronic conditions in the European countries

BACKGROUND

The suboptimal uptake of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines among those with non-communicable chronic diseases is a public health concern, because it poses a higher risk of severe illness for individuals with underlying health conditions, emphasizing the need to address barriers to vaccination and ensure adequate protection for this vulnerable population. In the present study, we aimed to identify whether people with chronic illnesses are more likely to get vaccinated against COVID-19 and influenza in the European Union.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data on 49,253 men (n = 20,569) and women (n = 28,684) were obtained from the ninth round of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (June - August, 2021). The outcome variables were self-reported COVID-19 and influenza vaccine uptake status. The association between the uptake of the vaccines and six preexisting conditions including high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, chronic lung disease, diabetes, chronic bronchitis, and asthma was estimated using binary logistic regression methods.

RESULTS

The vaccination coverage for COVID-19 ranged from close to 100% in Denmark (98.2%) and Malta (98.2%) to less than 50% in Bulgaria (19.1%) and Romania (32.7%). The countries with the highest percentage of participants with the influenza vaccine included Malta (66.7%), Spain (63.7%) and the Netherlands (62.5%), and those with the lowest percentage included Bulgaria (3.7%), Slovakia (5.8%) and Poland (9.2%). Participants with high blood pressure were 3% less likely [Risk difference (RD) = -0.03, 95% CI = -0.04, -0.03] to report taking COVID-19 and influenza [RD = -0.03, 95% CI= -0.04, -0.01] vaccine. Those with chronic lung disease were 4% less likely [RD = -0.04, 95% CI= -0.06, -0.03] to report taking COVID-19 and 2% less likely [RD= -0.02, 95% CI = -0.04, -0.01] to report taking influenza vaccine. Men and women with high blood pressure were 3% less likely to have reported taking both of the vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

Current findings indicate a suboptimal uptake of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines among adult men and women in the EU countries. Those with preexisting conditions, including high blood pressure and chronic lung disease are less likely to take the vaccines.

Serosurveillance among urban slum and non-slum populations immunized with COVID-19 vaccines in Bangladesh

Using two rounds of serosurveillance, we aimed to observe the COVID-19 vaccination status and the dynamics of antibody responses to different vaccines among urban slum and non-slum populations of Bangladesh. Adults (>18 years) and children (10-17 years) were enrolled in March and October 2022. Data including COVID-19 vaccine types and dosage uptake were collected. SARS-CoV-2 spike (S)-specific antibodies were measured in blood. The proportion of vaccinated children was significantly lower among slum than non-slum populations. Two doses of vaccines showed an increase in the level of anti-S-antibodies up to 2 months, followed by reduced levels at 2-6 months and a resurgence at 6-12 months. Children showed significantly higher anti-S-antibodies after two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine than adults; however, after 6 months, the level of antibodies declined in younger children (10 - < 12 years). In a mixed vaccine approach, mRNA vaccines contributed to the highest antibody response whether given as the first two doses or as the third dose. Our findings emphasized the need for increasing the coverage of COVID-19 vaccination among slum children and booster dosing among all children. The use of mRNA vaccines in the mixed vaccination approach was found to be useful in boosting the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2.

Effects of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines on Sperm Quality: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has triggered a global public health crisis of unprecedented proportions. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is a highly effective strategy for preventing infections and severe COVID-19 outcomes. Although several studies have concluded that COVID-19 vaccines are unlikely to affect fertility, concerns have arisen regarding adverse events, including the potential impact on fertility; these concerns are plagued by limited and inconsistent evidence.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to provide a recent assessment of the literature on the impact of COVID-19 vaccines on male sperm quality. The possible impact of COVID-19 vaccines on fertility potential was also examined to draw a clearer picture and to evaluate the effects of COVID-19 on male reproductive health.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from their inception to October 2023. Eligible studies included articles reporting SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and human semen quality and fertility, as well as the impact of vaccination on assisted reproductive technology treatment outcomes. The quality of cohort studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the quality of cross-sectional studies was assessed using the quality evaluation criteria recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The systematic review followed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

The initial literature search yielded 4691 records by searching 5 peer-reviewed databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane). Finally, 24 relevant studies were selected for our study. There were evident research inequalities at the regional level, with the United States and Western European countries contributing 38% (9/24) of the studies, Middle Eastern countries contributing 38% (9/24), China accounting for 21% (5/24), and Africa and South America accounting for none. Nonetheless, the overall quality of the included studies was generally good. Our results demonstrated that serious side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine are extremely rare, and men experience few problems with sperm parameters or reproductive potential after vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the studies published so far, the COVID-19 vaccine is safe for male reproductive health. Obviously, vaccination is a wise option rather than experience serious adverse symptoms of viral infections. These instances of evidence may help reduce vaccine hesitancy and increase vaccination coverage, particularly among reproductive-age couples. As new controlled trials and prospective cohort studies with larger sample sizes emerge, the possibility of a negative effect of the COVID-19 vaccine on sperm quality must be further clarified.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among health and social care workers during mass vaccination in Scotland

Health and social care workers (HSCWs) have an essential role in the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccination is an emotionally charged issue and perceptions of risk associated with COVID19 can contribute towards vaccine hesitancy (VH). The aim of this study was to explore the role of emotion and risk perception associated with HSCWs' uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine during the initial mass roll-out of the vaccine in Scotland. A cross-sectional online survey with a correlational design was used. An online survey was conducted with HSCWs (N = 1189) aged 18 to 67 years (M = 44.09 yrs, SD = 11.48) working in Scotland during the third lockdown period (26 December - 31 March 2021) of the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey collected data relating to sociodemographic characteristics, vaccine uptake and VH, emotions associated with the COVID-19 vaccine, and risk perception. Open-ended free text data were also collected on HSCWs' main reasons for VH. Most participants (83.96%) felt positively about the roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine, stating it would be beneficial for themselves and others to receive it. Nonetheless, 16.04% of HSCWs expressed VH. Occupational group, age, gender and risk perceptions did not affect variance in VH, but positive emotions associated with the COVID-19 vaccine and years of experience did. We emphasise the importance of future interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake by enhancing positive emotions and reducing ambivalent emotions associated with the COVID-19 vaccine particularly among less experienced HSCWs.

Social interactions and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: Evidence from a full population study in Sweden

We investigate whether an individual's information milieu-an individual's residential neighborhood and co-workers-affects the decision to get a COVID-19 vaccine. The decision to accept or refuse a vaccine is intensely personal and involves the processing of information about phenomena likely to be unfamiliar to most individuals. One can thus expect an interplay between an individual's level of education and skills and the information processing of others whom with whom she can interact and whose decision she can probe and observe. Using individual-level data for adults in Sweden, we can identify the proportion of an individual's neighborhood and workplace who are unvaccinated as indicators of possible peer effects. We find that individuals with low levels of educational attainment and occupational skills are more likely to be unvaccinated when exposed to other unvaccinated individuals at work and in the residential neighborhood. The peer effects in each of these information milieus further increases the likelihood of not getting vaccinated-with the two acting as information channels that reinforce one another.

Deep Learning Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Confidence Expressed on Twitter in 6 High-Income Countries: Longitudinal Observational Study

BACKGROUND

An ongoing monitoring of national and subnational trajectory of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy could offer support in designing tailored policies on improving vaccine uptake.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to track the temporal and spatial distribution of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and confidence expressed on Twitter during the entire pandemic period in major English-speaking countries.

METHODS

We collected 5,257,385 English-language tweets regarding COVID-19 vaccination between January 1, 2020, and June 30, 2022, in 6 countries-the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Ireland. Transformer-based deep learning models were developed to classify each tweet as intent to accept or reject COVID-19 vaccination and the belief that COVID-19 vaccine is effective or unsafe. Sociodemographic factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and confidence in the United States were analyzed using bivariate and multivariable linear regressions.

RESULTS

The 6 countries experienced similar evolving trends of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and confidence. On average, the prevalence of intent to accept COVID-19 vaccination decreased from 71.38% of 44,944 tweets in March 2020 to 34.85% of 48,167 tweets in June 2022 with fluctuations. The prevalence of believing COVID-19 vaccines to be unsafe continuously rose by 7.49 times from March 2020 (2.84% of 44,944 tweets) to June 2022 (21.27% of 48,167 tweets). COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and confidence varied by country, vaccine manufacturer, and states within a country. The democrat party and higher vaccine confidence were significantly associated with lower vaccine hesitancy across US states.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and confidence evolved and were influenced by the development of vaccines and viruses during the pandemic. Large-scale self-generated discourses on social media and deep learning models provide a cost-efficient approach to monitoring routine vaccine hesitancy.

COVID-19 Vaccination Willingness and Reasons for Vaccine Refusal

Importance

Hong Kong was held as an exemplar for pandemic response until it recorded the world's highest daily COVID-19 mortality, which was likely due to vaccine refusal. To prevent this high mortality in future pandemics, information on underlying reasons for vaccine refusal is necessary.

Objectives

To track the evolution of COVID-19 vaccination willingness and uptake from before vaccine rollout to mass vaccination, to examine factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine refusal and compare with data from Singapore, and to assess the population attributable fraction for vaccine refusal.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used data from randomly sampled participants from 14 waves of population-based studies in Hong Kong (February 2020 to May 2022) and 2 waves of population-based studies in Singapore (May 2020 to June 2021 and October 2021 to January 2022), and a population-wide registry of COVID-19 vaccination appointments. Data were analyzed from February 23, 2021, to May 30, 2022.

Exposures

Trust in COVID-19 vaccine information sources (ie, health authorities, physicians, traditional media, and social media); COVID-19 vaccine confidence on effectiveness, safety, and importance; COVID-19 vaccine misconceptions on safety and high-risk groups; political views; and COVID-19 policies (ie, workplace vaccine mandates and vaccine pass).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes were the weighted prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination willingness over the pandemic, adjusted incidence rate ratios, and population attributable fractions of COVID-19 vaccine refusal. A secondary outcome was change in daily COVID-19 vaccination appointments.

Results

The study included 28 007 interviews from 20 waves of longitudinal data, with 1114 participants in the most recent wave (median [range] age, 54.2 years [20-92] years; 571 [51.3%] female). Four factors-mistrust in health authorities, low vaccine confidence, vaccine misconceptions, and political views-could jointly account for 82.2% (95% CI, 62.3%-100.0%) of vaccine refusal in adults aged 18 to 59 years and 69.3% (95% CI, 47.2%-91.4%) of vaccine refusal in adults aged 60 years and older. Workplace vaccine mandates were associated with 62.2% (95% CI, 9.9%-139.2%) increases in daily COVID-19 vaccination appointments, and the Hong Kong vaccine pass was associated with 124.8% (95% CI, 65.9%-204.6%) increases in daily COVID-19 vaccination appointments.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that trust in health authorities was fundamental to overcoming vaccine hesitancy. As such, engendering trust in health care professionals, experts, and public health agencies should be incorporated into pandemic preparedness and response.

Addressing message fatigue for encouraging COVID-19 vaccination

During the prolonged COVID-19 pandemic, health communication researchers and practitioners should be aware of the unintended effects of message fatigue. Message fatigue is a motivational state caused by repeated and prolonged exposure to similar health-related messages that induces resistance to health behaviors. Messages encouraging COVID-19 vaccination tend to focus on scientific evidence and efficacy information. However, prolonged exposure to similarly framed repeated pro-COVID-19 vaccination messages may cause message fatigue, generate psychological reactance, and lead to ineffective persuasive outcomes. Scholars of message fatigue argue that health communication practitioners should select a less common frame to reduce fatigue responses and increase favorable attitudes toward message recommendations. Entering the second year since COVID-19 vaccination has begun, to reduce message fatigue, future pro-COVID-19 vaccination communication should increase the diversity of messages different than the frequently used types. This opinion piece proposes alternative dissemination of cognitive, affective, narrative, and non-narrative pro-COVID-19 vaccination messages.

A risk science perspective on vaccines

Vaccines can be seen as one of the greatest successes in modern medicine. Good examples are the vaccines against smallpox, polio, and measles. Unfortunately, vaccines can have side effects, but the risks are considered by the health authorities and experts to be small compared to their benefits. Nevertheless, there are many who are skeptical of vaccination, something which has been very clearly demonstrated in relation to the COVID-19 disease. Risk is the key concept when evaluating a vaccine, in relation to both its ability to protect against the disease and its side effects. However, risk is a challenging concept to measure, which makes communication about vaccines' performance and side effects difficult. The present article aims at providing new insights into vaccine risks-the understanding, perception, communication, and handling of them-by adopting what is here referred to as a contemporary risk science perspective. This perspective clarifies the relationships between the risk concept and terms like uncertainty, knowledge, and probability. The skepticism toward vaccines is multifaceted, and influenced by concerns that extend beyond the effectiveness and safety of the vaccines. However, by clarifying the relationships between key concepts of risk, particularly how uncertainty affects risk and its characterization, we can improve our understanding of this issue.

Chatting with ChatGPT to learn about safety of COVID-19 vaccines - A perspective

Vaccine hesitancy is among the top 10 threats to global health, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). In this exploration, we delve into ChatGPT capacity to generate opinions on vaccine hesitancy by interrogating this AI chatbot for the 50 most prevalent counterfait messages, false and true contraindications, and myths circulating on the internet regarding vaccine safety. Our results indicate that, while the present version of ChatGPT's default responses may be incomplete, they are generally satisfactory. Although ChatGPT cannot substitute an expert or the scientific evidence itself, this form of AI has the potential to guide users toward information that aligns well with scientific evidence.

Volatility of the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: sentiment analysis conducted in Brazil

Background

Vaccine hesitancy is a phenomenon that can interfere with the expansion of vaccination coverage and is positioned as one of the top 10 global health threats. Previous studies have explored factors that affect vaccine hesitancy, how it behaves in different locations, and the profile of individuals in which it is most present. However, few studies have analyzed the volatility of vaccine hesitancy.

Objective

Identify the volatility of vaccine hesitancy manifested in social media.

Methods

Twitter's academic application programming interface was used to retrieve all tweets in Brazilian Portuguese mentioning the COVID-19 vaccine in 3 months (October 2020, June 2021, and October 2021), retrieving 1,048,576 tweets. A sentiment analysis was performed using the Orange software with the lexicon Multilingual sentiment in Portuguese.

Results

The feelings associated with vaccine hesitancy were volatile within 1 month, as well as throughout the vaccination process, being positioned as a resilient phenomenon. The themes that nurture vaccine hesitancy change dynamically and swiftly and are often associated with other topics that are also affecting society.

Conclusion

People that manifest the vaccine hesitancy present arguments that vary in a short period of time, what demand that government strategies to mitigate vaccine hesitancy effects be agile and counteract the expressed fear, by presenting scientific arguments.

Predictors and motives for mask-wearing behavior and vaccination intention

Containing a pandemic requires that individuals adhere to measures such as wearing face-masks and getting vaccinated. Therefore, identifying predictors and motives for both behaviors is of importance. Here, we study the decisions made by a cross-national sample in randomized hypothetical scenarios during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our results show that mask-wearing was predicted by empathic tendencies, germ aversion, and higher age, whilst belief in misinformation and presentation of an interaction partner as a family member lowered the safety standards. The main motives associated with taking the mask off included: rationalization, facilitating interaction, and comfort. Vaccination intention was positively predicted by empathy, and negatively predicted by belief in misinformation and higher costs of the vaccine. We found no effect of immunization status of the surrounding social group. The most common motive for vaccination was protection of oneself and others, whereas undecided and anti-vaccine groups reported doubts about the effectiveness and fear of side effects. Together, we identify social and psychological predictors and motives of mask-wearing behavior and vaccination intention. The results highlight the importance of social context for mask-wearing, easy access to vaccines, empathy, and trust in publicly distributed information.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Patients Recovered from COVID-19 Infection in Wuhan, China: A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study

BACKGROUND

Although patients recovered from COVID-19 infection already have immunity gained from natural infection, they are still at risk of reinfection due to the emergence of new variants of COVID-19 and the diminishing of naturally acquired immunity. COVID-19 vaccine is associated with efficacious protection against COVID-19 infection and could boost infection-acquired immunity, however, certain amounts of COVID-19 survivors have not been vaccinated due to vaccine hesitancy.

OBJECTIVE

The current study aimed to investigate COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and related factors among COVID-19 survivors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted among patients recovered from COVID-19 infection in Wuhan, China between June 10 and July 25, 2021. Questionnaire included sociodemographic information, items on COVID-19 infection, the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale based on the 3Cs' model, trust in vaccine manufacturers and health facilities, and reasons for the decision to COVID-19 vaccination. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to assess the influenced factors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

RESULTS

Among 1422 participants, 538 (37.8%) were not vaccinated against COVID-19. COVID-19 recovered patients who perceived current unhealthy status had more hesitancy about COVID-19 vaccine than those who perceived themselves healthy (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.28-0.71). Compared to the asymptomatic patients, patients with mild symptoms were more likely to receive COVID-19 vaccine (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.02-2.82). Regarding the 3Cs' model, high complacency and low convenience were significant negative factors for COVID-19 vaccination (P<.05). Trust in vaccine manufacturers and health facilities was a significant positive factor for COVID-19 vaccination (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.09-1.19). "Self-needs" was the main reason for patients to receive the COVID-19 vaccine; "already have antibodies and do not need vaccination" was the main reason for patients not to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the three major factors of vaccine hesitancy, complacency was proved the most notable one among COVID-19 recovered patients, educational campaigns can focus on raising the awareness of risk of infection and the benefits of vaccination to reduce complacency toward vaccination among them. For COVID-19 recovered patients, improving factors related to convenience such as transportation and environment of vaccination and proving door-to-door service were also necessary to facilitate their vaccination. In addition, addressing the concerns about vaccination of COVID-19 recovered patients could foster trust and promote their vaccination.

CLINICALTRIAL

What does the French public consider to be a conflict of interest for medical researchers?

Conflicts of interests have been at the core of public debate over health and medicine for decades. Social scientists have analysed the diversity of definitions of this label as well as the policies put in place to regulate the relationships between medical researchers and various actors such as private corporations. But little attention has been paid to the way the public define and use this label. In this article, we assess what the French public consider to be a conflict of interest for medical researchers. We draw on the data from a questionnaire-based survey conducted with a representative sample of the French population in December 2021 (n = 2022) where we asked respondents to decide whether different situations constituted a conflict of interest or not. These situations concerned medical researchers' relationships with economic actors but also with politicians and the media, with or without financial compensation for the researcher. We identified three main group profiles in terms of respondents' conception of what counts as a conflict of interest: i) considering that only money matters in the labelling of a given situation as a conflict of interest, ii) considering that any relationship with economic, media and political actors constitutes a conflict of interest (i.e., that medical research should be an ivory tower), and iii) indecision as to what constitutes a conflict of interest. These three groups differed in terms of social composition as well as respondents' relationships to science, politics, and the health care system.

Resistance to COVID-19 vaccination and the social contract: evidence from Italy

Confronted with stalled vaccination efforts against COVID-19, many governments embraced mandates and other measures to incentivize vaccination that excluded the unvaccinated from aspects of social and economic life. Even still, many citizens remained unvaccinated. We advance a social contract framework for understanding who remains unvaccinated and why. We leverage both observational and individual-level survey evidence from Italy to study the relationship between vaccination status and social context, social trust, political partisanship, and adherence to core institutional structures such as the rule of law and collective commitments. We find that attitudes toward the rule of law and collective commitments outside the domain of vaccination are strongly associated with compliance with vaccine mandates and incentives. Partisanship also corresponds with vaccine behaviors, as supporters of parties whose leaders criticized aggressive policies to incentivize or mandate vaccination and emphasized individual liberty are least likely to comply. Our findings suggest appeals emphasizing individual benefits may be more effective than appeals emphasizing collective responsibility.

The political component of COVID-19 vaccine choice: Results from a conjoint experiment

OBJECTIVES

Prior research highlights the role of efficacy, vaccine safety, and availability in vaccine hesitancy. Research is needed to better understand the political driving forces behind COVID-19 vaccine uptake. We examine the effects of the origin of a vaccine, and approval status within the EU on vaccine choice. We also test if these effects differ by party affiliation among Hungarians.

STUDY DESIGN

We use a conjoint experimental design to assess multiple causal relationships. Respondents choose between two hypothetical vaccine profiles randomly generated from 10 attributes. The data were gathered from an online panel in September 2022. We applied a quota for vaccination status and party preference. Three hundred twenty-four respondents evaluated 3888 randomly generated vaccine profiles.

METHODS

We analyse the data using an OLS estimator with standard errors clustered by respondents. To further nuance our results, we test for task, profile, and treatment heterogeneity effects.

RESULTS

By origin, respondents prefer German (MM 0.55; 95% CI 0.52-0.58) and Hungarian (0.55; 0.52-0.59) vaccines over US (0.49; 0.45-0.52) and Chinese vaccines (0.44; 0.41-0.47). By approval status, vaccines approved by the EU (0.55, 0.52-0.57) or pending authorization (0.5, 0.48-0.53) are preferred over unauthorised ones (0.45, 0.43-0.47). Both effects are conditional on party affiliation. Government voters especially prefer Hungarian vaccines (0.6; 0.55-0.65) over others.

CONCLUSIONS

The complexity of vaccination decisions calls for the usage of information shortcuts. Our findings demonstrate a strong political component that motivates vaccine choice. We demonstrate that politics and ideology have broken into fields of individual-level decisions such as health.

Mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers: A discussion paper

BACKGROUND

The devastating effects of COVID-19 sparked debates among professionals in the fields of health, law, and bioethics regarding policies on mandatory vaccination for healthcare workers. Suboptimal vaccine uptake among healthcare workers had been implicated in the increased risk of nosocomial spread of COVID infection and absenteeism among healthcare workers, impacting the quality of patient care. However, mandatory vaccine policies were also seen to encroach on the autonomy of healthcare workers.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To synthesise the arguments for and against mandatory vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) and its long-term impact on the healthcare workforce, through an analysis of texts and opinions of professionals from different fields of study.

METHODS

This is a systematic review of opinions published in peer-reviewed journals. After initial search in Cochrane and JBI systematic review databases to ensure no previous review had been done, five databases were searched (PsychInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline and Scopus). Inclusion criteria were: 1) focused on COVID-19; 2) healthcare workers specific; 3) specific to mandatory vaccination; 4) opinion piece with an identified author; and 5) in English.

EXCLUSION

1) focus on other vaccine preventable diseases, not COVID-19 and 2) discussion on mandatory vaccination not-specific to healthcare workers. The Joanna Briggs Critical Appraisal tool for Text and Opinions was used to assess quality. Data were synthesised in the summary table.

RESULTS

The review included 28 opinion and viewpoint articles. Of these, 12 (43 %) adopted a pro-mandatory vaccination stance, 13 (46 %) were neutral or had presented arguments from both sides of the debate and only three (11 %) were against. The overall arguments among those who were pro-, neutral and anti-mandatory COVID-19 vaccination were underpinned by ethical, moral and legal principles of such a mandate on a vulnerable healthcare workforce. This review highlighted the polarised opinions concerning choices, human rights, professional responsibilities and personal risks (i.e. health risks, losing a job) with the introduction of vaccination mandate. However, the articles found in this review discussed mandatory vaccination of healthcare workers in the USA, Europe and Australia only.

CONCLUSION

The review underscores the need to balance the rights of the public to safe and quality care with the rights and moral obligations of healthcare workers during a public health emergency. This can be achieved when policies and mandates are guided by reliable scientific evidence which are flexible in considering legal and ethical dilemmas.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

To mandate or not to mandate COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers: A synthesis of published opinions in health, law, and bioethics.

Promoting COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance through Community Engagement: An Ethnographic Study in Ghana

Introduction. To successfully manage COVID-19 and to meet the target of vaccinating 22.9 million people in Ghana, the government has adopted community engagement as one of the strategies. Yet, the Volta Region continues to record the lowest rate of vaccine acceptance in Ghana. This study explored how government institutions engaged communities on COVID-19 vaccine preparedness and acceptance in two administrative municipalities in Ghana. Methods. This qualitative study employed face-to-face in-depth interviews among thirty-six respondents comprising of government officials and community leaders and ten focus group discussions among 87 people made up of men and women most of whom were natives and some migrants in two administrative municipalities in Ghana. Data were collected from June to September 2021. Audio interviews were transcribed and uploaded to Nvivo 12 to support triangulation, coding, and thematic analysis. Ethical approval was obtained from the requisite authority, and all COVID-19 restrictions were observed. Results. Government institutions focused on informing communities of vaccines and vaccination with little input from the communities. The Ghana Health Service carried out the most extensive engagement because they had more decentralized institutions. Successful engagement activities resulted in vaccine acceptance among some community members. Challenges in community engagement included insufficient logistics and myths and misconceptions about vaccines, which accounted for some community members’ lack of trust in vaccines, resulting in their unwillingness to vaccinate. Government officials used innovative approaches such as comparing the safety of COVID-19 vaccines to vaccines designed for children under the age of five years to deal with misinformation. Conclusion. Government needs to provide more resources to institutions that are mandated to carry out engagement activities to enable them carry out their tasks. It is further recommended that government institutions should intensify community engagement in distant communities to support the country to meet the target.

Locating vaccine uptake and public participation in Ukraine: An exploratory qualitative study on attitudes and barriers to early childhood vaccination

A growing body of literature on vaccine hesitancy considers context and the intersecting factors affecting vaccine uptake. This study attempts to add focus to the conversation of vaccines in Ukraine by exploring how vaccines are perceived and how local stakeholders envision solutions to the problems surrounding vaccine uptake. Twenty-five in-depth interviews were carried out among parents of children under 6 years of age as well as health practitioners and other experts in Ukraine. Results were presented to stakeholders during a dialogue session to discuss the implications for policy recommendations. The Roma parents interviewed faced structural barriers to vaccine access, while other groups received vaccine information from others in their communities, such as family members or religious organisations. Mistrust of the health system and lack of access to reliable information preceded many doubts parents expressed surrounding vaccines. Stakeholders agreed that better, more targeted communication strategies are needed, as well as increased engagement with and training of medical practitioners. Qualitative methods allowed for a deeper, more nuanced understanding of the factors contributing to low vaccine uptake, of which vaccine hesitancy is only one part. The vulnerability-informed approach used may have broader applications for community engagement and responding to infectious diseases and crises.

Embracing context: Lessons from designing a dialogue-based intervention to address vaccine hesitancy

Dialogue with people who are vaccine hesitant has been recommended as a method to increase vaccination uptake. The process of cultivating dialogue is shaped by the context in which it occurs, yet the development of interventions addressing vaccine hesitancy with dialogue often overlooks the role of context and favors relatively fixed solutions. This reflexive paper shares three key lessons related to context for dialogue-based interventions. These lessons emerged during a participatory research project to develop a pilot intervention to create open dialogue among healthcare workers in Belgium about COVID-19 vaccination concerns. Through a mixed methods study consisting of in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, and surveys, we engaged healthcare workers in the design, testing, and evaluation of a digital platform featuring text-based and video-based (face-to-face) interactions. The lessons are: (1) what dialogue means, entails, and requires can vary for a population and context, (2) inherent tension exists between helping participants voice (and overcome) their concerns and exposing them to others' ideas that may exacerbate those concerns, and (3) interactional exchanges (e.g., with peers or experts) that matter to participants may shape the dialogue in terms of its content and form. We suggest that having a discovery-orientation-meaning to work not only inductively and iteratively but also reflexively-is a necessary part of the development of dialogue-based interventions. Our case also sheds light on the influences between: dialogue topic/content, socio-political landscape, population, intervention aim, dialogue form, ethics, researcher position, and types of interactional exchanges.

Discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated people during the pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, sizeable groups of unvaccinated people persist even in countries with high vaccine access¹. As a consequence, vaccination became a controversial subject of debate and even protest². Here we assess whether people express discriminatory attitudes in the form of negative affectivity, stereotypes and exclusionary attitudes in family and political settings across groups defined by COVID-19 vaccination status. We quantify discriminatory attitudes between vaccinated and unvaccinated citizens in 21 countries, covering a diverse set of cultures across the world. Across three conjoined experimental studies (n = 15,233), we demonstrate that vaccinated people express discriminatory attitudes towards unvaccinated individuals at a level as high as discriminatory attitudes that are commonly aimed at immigrant and minority populations^3-5. By contrast, there is an absence of evidence that unvaccinated individuals display discriminatory attitudes towards vaccinated people, except for the presence of negative affectivity in Germany and the USA. We find evidence in support of discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated individuals in all countries except for Hungary and Romania, and find that discriminatory attitudes are more strongly expressed in cultures with stronger cooperative norms. Previous research on the psychology of cooperation has shown that individuals react negatively against perceived 'free-riders'^6,7, including in the domain of vaccinations^8,9. Consistent with this, we find that contributors to the public good of epidemic control (that is, vaccinated individuals) react with discriminatory attitudes towards perceived free-riders (that is, unvaccinated individuals). National leaders and vaccinated members of the public appealed to moral obligations to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake^10,11, but our findings suggest that discriminatory attitudes-including support for the removal of fundamental rights-simultaneously emerged.

Vaccine Mandates in the COVID-19 Era: Changing Paradigm or Public Health Opportunity? Comment on "Convergence on Coercion: Functional and Political Pressures as Drivers of Global Childhood Vaccine Mandates"

The debate around vaccine mandates has flourished over the last decade, with several countries introducing or extending mandatory childhood vaccinations. In a recent study, Attwell and Hannah explore how functional and political pressures added to public health threats in selected countries, motivating governments to increase the coerciveness of their childhood vaccine regimes. In this commentary, we reflect on whether such model applies to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case and how the pandemic has re-shuffled the deck around vaccine mandates. We identify COVID-19 immunisation policies' distinctive aspects as we make the case of countries implementing mass immunisation programmes while relying on digital COVID-19 certificates as an indirect form of mandate to increase vaccine uptake. We conclude by acknowledging that different forms of mandatory vaccination might serve as a shortcut to protect population health in times of emergency, underlining, however, that the ultimate public health goal is to promote voluntary, informed, and responsible adherence to preventive behaviours.

COVID-19 vaccines: the imperfect instruments of vaccine diplomacy

Although true vaccine diplomacy in the form of sharing vaccine development technologies and scientific cooperation with low- and middle-income countries has not been a dominant theme in the COVID-19 pandemic, this aspect is now taking off and generating some exciting new possibilities.

Distrustful Complacency and the COVID-19 Vaccine: How Concern and Political Trust Interact to Affect Vaccine Hesitancy

We test the hypothesis that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is attributable to distrustful complacency-an interactive combination of low concern and low trust. Across two studies, 9,695 respondents from different parts of Britain reported their level of concern about COVID-19, trust in the UK government, and intention to accept or refuse the vaccine. Multilevel regression analysis, controlling for geographic area and relevant demographics, confirmed the predicted interactive effect of concern and trust. Across studies, respondents with both low trust and low concern were 10%-22% more vaccine hesitant than respondents with either high trust or high concern, and 26%-29% more hesitant than respondents with both high trust and high concern. Results hold equally among White, Black, and Muslim respondents, consistent with the view that regardless of mean-level differences, a common process underlies vaccine hesitancy, underlining the importance of tackling distrustful complacency both generally and specifically among unvaccinated individuals and populations.

Improving older adults' vaccination uptake: Are existing measures of vaccine hesitancy valid and reliable for older people?

We sought to establish whether two recently developed measures, the 5C scale and the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) were reliable and valid for use with older adults. A total of 372 UK-dwelling participants (65-92 years, M = 70.5 years, SD = 4.6) completed a cross-sectional survey measuring health and socio-demographic characteristics in relation to vaccine uptake for influenza, pneumococcal and shingles. The 5C and VAX scales were administered to test their reliability, validity and dimensionality. Both scales showed good internal reliability and convergent, discriminant and concurrent validity. Their factor structures were also confirmed, supporting their use with older adult populations.

Developing a Roadmap for Mass Vaccination of COVID-19 in Iran: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Nowadays, the Covid-19 pandemic is 1 of the most important challenges worldwide, especially in terms of health. The most important strategy to prevent and control the Covid-19 pandemic is mass vaccination. This study aimed at developing a roadmap for the mass vaccination of COVID-19 in Iran.

METHODS

The current study was conducted using a qualitative approach with a content analysis method. In the first step, the review of literature and documents was carried out by a search in scientific databases. In the next step, the data were amassed via in-depth and semi-structured interviews with experts who were selected purposefully, including policymakers, health care workers, and managers. After this, 3 multidisciplinary expert panels for roadmap development were held.

RESULTS

Based on the literature review, interviews, and 3 stages of an expert panel, the final roadmap was developed with 5 dimensions. These included outcomes, planning and preparation, strategies, and preparation, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

This roadmap was developed to improve mass vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to our findings, it is strongly recommended that the vaccination roadmap with all the above-mentioned features and comprehensive structure should be applied to mitigate the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Characterising reasons for reversals of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among Japanese people: One-year follow-up survey

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy is a global public health threat. We present unique data that characterises those who experienced reversals of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in Japan.

METHODS

We administered a questionnaire on vaccination intention among 30053 Japanese adults aged 20 years or older before the COVID-19 vaccination was available to the general population (first survey) and conducted a follow-up survey on vaccination status one year later in February 2022 (second survey). Those who responded in the first survey that they did not intend to be vaccinated or were unsure and then responded in the second survey that they were vaccinated or intend to be vaccinated were asked about the reasons for their change of heart. Based on previous literature and expert opinion, 31 reasons for changing vaccination intention were compiled and respondents were asked to choose which among them applied to themselves, with multiple responses possible. Based on the results of those responses, each individual was then clustered using the Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP) dimensionality reduction technique and Ordering Points To Identify the Clustering Structure (OPTICS) algorithm. We then identified unique characteristics among each of the sub-populations (clusters).

FINDINGS

In the second survey we received 19195 responses (response rate 63.9%), of which 8077 responded 'no' or 'not sure' in the first survey regarding their intention to be vaccinated. Of these, 5861 responded having received or intending to receive the vaccine (72.6%). We detected six and five sub-populations (clusters) among the 'no' group and 'not sure' group, respectively. The clusters were characterized by perceived benefits of vaccination, including the COVID-19 vaccine, awareness of the COVID-19 vaccination status of those close to them, recognition of the social significance of COVID-19 vaccination for the spread of infection, and dispelled concerns about short-term adverse reactions and the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine. Work and personal relationship reasons were also found to be a unique overarching reason for vaccination changes of heart only among those who did not intend to vaccinate.

INTERPRETATION

Those who changed their intention to accept COVID-19 vaccination as well as their unique characteristics as detailed in this study will be important entry points when discussing how to promote vaccination to those who are hesitant to vaccinate in the future.

FUNDING

The present work was supported in part by a grant from the Kanagawa Prefectural Government of Japan and by AIST government subsidies.

Community-level characteristics of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in England: A nationwide cross-sectional study

One year after the start of the COVID-19 vaccination programme in England, more than 43 million people older than 12 years old had received at least a first dose. Nevertheless, geographical differences persist, and vaccine hesitancy is still a major public health concern; understanding its determinants is crucial to managing the COVID-19 pandemic and preparing for future ones. In this cross-sectional population-based study we used cumulative data on the first dose of vaccine received by 01-01-2022 at Middle Super Output Area level in England. We used Bayesian hierarchical spatial models and investigated if the geographical differences in vaccination uptake can be explained by a range of community-level characteristics covering socio-demographics, political view, COVID-19 health risk awareness and targeting of high risk groups and accessibility. Deprivation is the covariate most strongly associated with vaccine uptake (Odds Ratio 0.55, 95%CI 0.54-0.57; most versus least deprived areas). The most ethnically diverse areas have a 38% (95%CI 36-40%) lower odds of vaccine uptake compared with those least diverse. Areas with the highest proportion of population between 12 and 24 years old had lower odds of vaccination (0.87, 95%CI 0.85-0.89). Finally increase in vaccine accessibility is associated with COVID-19 vaccine coverage (OR 1.07, 95%CI 1.03-1.12). Our results suggest that one year after the start of the vaccination programme, there is still evidence of inequalities in uptake, affecting particularly minorities and marginalised groups. Strategies including prioritising active outreach across communities and removing practical barriers and factors that make vaccines less accessible are needed to level up the differences.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: The Perils of Peddling Science by Social Media and the Lay Press

Introduction: Vaccines are the best tools to end the pandemic, and their public acceptance is crucial in achieving herd immunity. Despite global efforts to increase access to vaccination, the World Health Organization explicitly lists vaccination hesitancy (VH) as a significant threat. Despite robust safety reports from regulatory authorities and public health advisories, a substantial proportion of the community remains obsessed with the hazards of vaccination. This calls for identifying and eliminating possible causative elements, among which this study investigates the inappropriate dissemination of medical literature concerning COVID-19 and adverse events following immunization (AEFI), its influence on promoting VH, and proposals for overcoming this problem in the future. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases, using the keywords “adverse events following immunization (AEFI)”, “COVID-19”, “vaccines” and “hesitancy” and related medical and subjective headings (MeSH) up to 31 March 2022, and extracted studies relevant to the COVID-19 AEFI and associated VH. Finally, 47 articles were chosen to generate a narrative synthesis. Results: The databases depicted a steep rise in publications on COVID-19 AEFI and COVID-19 VH from January 2021 onwards. The articles depicted multiple events of mild AEFIs without fatal events in recipients. While documenting AEFIs is praiseworthy, publishing such reports without prior expert surveillance can exaggerate public apprehension and inappropriately fuel VH. VH is a deep-rooted phenomenon, but it is difficult to zero in on the exact reason for it. Spreading rumors/misinformation on COVID-19 vaccines might be an important provocation for VH, which includes indiscriminately reporting AEFI on a massive scale. While a number of reported AEFIs fall within the acceptable limits in the course of extensive COVID-19 vaccinations, it is important to critically evaluate and moderate the reporting and dissemination of AEFI in order to allay panic. Conclusions: Vaccination programs are necessary to end any pandemic, and VH may be attributed to multiple reasons. VH may be assuaged by initiating educational programs on the importance of vaccination, raising public awareness and monitoring the inappropriate dissemination of misleading information. Government-initiated strategies can potentially restrict random AEFI reports from lay epidemiologists and healthcare practitioners.

Acceptance of and Preference for COVID-19 Vaccination in India, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, and Spain: An International Cross-Sectional Study

Objective: India and Europe have large populations, a large number of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, and different healthcare systems. This study aims to investigate the differences between the hesitancy toward and preference for COVID-19 vaccines in India and four European countries, namely, the United Kingdom (UK), Germany, Italy, and Spain. Methodology: We conducted a cross-national survey for distribution in India, the UK, Germany, Italy, and Spain. More specifically, a discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted to evaluate vaccine preferences, and Likert scales were used to probe the underlying factors that contribute to vaccination acceptance. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to directly compare India and European countries. Results: A total of 2565 respondents (835 from India and 1730 from the specified countries in Europe) participated in the survey. After PSM, more than 82.5% of respondents from India positively accepted the COVID-19 vaccination, whereas 79.9% of respondents from Europe had a positive attitude; however, the proportion in Europe changed to 81.6% in cases in which the vaccine was recommended by friends, family, or employers. The DCE found that the COVID-19 vaccine efficacy was the most important factor for respondents in India and the four European nations (41.8% in India and 47.77% in Europe), followed by the vaccine cost (28.06% in India and 25.88% in Europe). Conclusion: Although most respondents in both regions showed high acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines, either due to general acceptance or acceptance as a result of social cues, the vaccination coverage rate shows apparent distinctions. Due to the differences in COVID-19 situations, public health systems, cultural backgrounds, and vaccine availability, the strategies for COVID-19 vaccine promotion should be nation-dependent.

Two-Tailed Dogs, Social Unrest and COVID-19 Vaccination: Politics, Hesitancy and Vaccine Choice in Hungary and Thailand

Background: A long tradition of research has shown an association between political orientation and vaccine uptake. However, we know little about political preferences and the choice of specific vaccines. Methods: We conducted two national surveys, in Hungary (Study 1, online, n = 1130) and Thailand (Study 2, on the street survey: n = 1052), testing associations between political allegiance, trust in government, vaccine willingness, and vaccine choice. Results: In Hungary, those supporting the government or on the political right were more willing to be vaccinated, with this association strongest for government approved vaccines. These respondents were also more likely to accept Chinese and Russian vaccines and reject the Moderna vaccine. In Thailand, vaccinated respondents reported greater trust in the government, with preference for AstraZeneca associated with support for pro-government political parties and preference for Pfizer with anti-government attitudes. Conclusions: Vaccine campaigns need to recognise the role of political loyalties not only in vaccine willingness, but in vaccine choice, especially given the mixing of vaccines across doses.

Caregivers' Attitudes Toward COVID-19 Vaccination in Children and Adolescents With a History of SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Background

Limited data are available on the attitudes of caregivers toward COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection or Long Covid symptoms. The aim of this study was to investigate the vaccine hesitancy among caregivers of children and adolescents with a documented history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and to explore the possible associations between COVID-19 manifestations and the acceptance of the vaccine.

Methods

Caregivers of children or adolescents with a microbiologically confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection evaluated in two University Hospitals were interviewed.

Results

We were able to contact 132 caregivers and 9 declined to participate. 68 caregivers (56%) were in favor of COVID-19 vaccination for their child. In the multiple logistic regression, child's age (OR 1.17, 95%CI 1.06-1.28) and hospitalization due to COVID-19 (OR 3.25, 95%CI 1.06-9.95) were positively associated with being in favor of COVID-19 vaccination. On the contrary, the occurrence of child's Long Covid was associated with a higher likelihood of being against the vaccination (OR 0.28, 95%CI 0.10-0.80).

Conclusions

This preliminary study shows that only about half of the interviewed parents of children and adolescents with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection are willing to vaccinate them to prevent a repeated COVID-19 infection. These findings might help healthcare workers to provide tailored information to caregivers of children with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection.

COVID-19 Vaccination and Rates of Infections, Hospitalizations, ICU Admissions, and Deaths in the European Economic Area during Autumn 2021 Wave of SARS-CoV-2

The COVID-19 vaccination campaigns were met with a varying level of vaccine hesitancy in Europe. We analyzed the potential relationships between COVID-19 vaccine coverage in different countries of the European Economic Area and rates of infection, hospitalizations, admissions to intensive care units (ICU), and deaths during the autumn 2021 SARS-CoV-2 wave (September−December). Significant negative correlations between infection rates and the percentage of fully vaccinated individuals were found during September, October, and November, but not December. The loss of this protective effect in December is likely due to the emergence of the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant, better adapted to evade vaccine-induced humoral immunity. For every considered month, the negative linear associations between the vaccine coverage and mean number of hospitalizations (r= −0.61 to −0.88), the mean number of ICU admissions (r= −0.62 to −0.81), and death rate (r= −0.64 to −0.84) were observed. The results highlight that vaccines provided significant benefits during autumn 2021. The vaccination of unvaccinated individuals should remain the primary strategy to decrease the hospital overloads, severe consequences of COVID-19, and deaths.

Is Mandatory Vaccination in Population over 60 Adequate to Control the COVID-19 Pandemic in E.U.?

Vaccine hesitancy, which potentially leads to the refusal or delayed acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines, is considered a key driver of the increasing death toll from the pandemic in the EU. The European Commission and several member states’ governments are either planning or have already directly or indirectly announced mandatory vaccination for individuals aged over 60, the group which has repeatedly proved to be the most vulnerable. In this paper, an assessment of this strategy’s benefits is attempted by deriving a metric for the potential gains of vaccination mandates that can be used to compare EU member states. This is completed by examining the reduction in Standard Expected Years of Life Lost (SEYLL) per person for the EU population over 60 as a function of the member states’ vaccination percentage in these ages. The publicly available data and results of the second iteration of the SHARE COVID-19 survey on the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines, conducted during the summer of 2021, are used as inputs.