Prosocial polio vaccination in Israel

Moral values and vaccination behavior in Russia during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

Effective persuasive communication necessitates message matching; the conveyed message should resonate with the recipient's characteristics, including individual moral values. While studies examining the relationship between moral values and vaccination behavior have been conducted in a limited number of countries, this study seeks to provide evidence on this relationship beyond Western democracies.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted from November 4 to December 17, 2021, in Russia. Participants reported their COVID-19 vaccination behavior and completed the Moral Foundations Questionnaire, designed to measure the endorsement of moral values (n = 415). Regression analysis was employed to assess the association between each moral foundation and COVID-19 vaccination behavior.

RESULTS

Our findings indicate that the moral foundations of Care, Loyalty, Fairness, and Sanctity significantly influence vaccination behavior. Individuals who strongly endorse Fairness (AME = -0.019; 95 % CI = -0.033, -0.005) and Sanctity (AME = -0.016; 95 % CI = -0.031, -0.002) were less likely to be vaccinated. Conversely, individuals endorsing Care (AME = -0.018; 95 % CI = -0.031, -0.005) and Loyalty (AME = -0.015; 95 % CI = -0.028, -0.001) were less likely to report refusal of vaccination. These results remain robust after adjusting for sociodemographic variables related to vaccination barriers.

CONCLUSION

Our findings carry public health implications; an understanding of the moral psychology underlying vaccination behavior can facilitate more targeted and effective health communication. Employing skillfully crafted moral appeals may mitigate negative attitudes toward vaccination and enhance vaccination rates.

Review of Poliovirus Transmission and Economic Modeling to Support Global Polio Eradication: 2020-2024

Continued investment in the development and application of mathematical models of poliovirus transmission, economics, and risks leads to their use in support of polio endgame strategy development and risk management policies. This study complements an earlier review covering the period 2000-2019 and discusses the evolution of studies published since 2020 by modeling groups supported by the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) partners and others. We systematically review modeling papers published in English in peer-reviewed journals from 2020-2024.25 that focus on poliovirus transmission and health economic analyses. In spite of the long-anticipated end of poliovirus transmission and the GPEI sunset, which would lead to the end of its support for modeling, we find that the number of modeling groups supported by GPEI partners doubled and the rate of their publications increased. Modeling continued to play a role in supporting GPEI and national/regional policies, but changes in polio eradication governance, decentralized management and decision-making, and increased heterogeneity in modeling approaches and findings decreased the overall impact of modeling results. Meanwhile, the failure of the 2016 globally coordinated cessation of type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine use for preventive immunization and the introduction of new poliovirus vaccines and formulation, increased the complexity and uncertainty of poliovirus transmission and economic models and policy recommendations during this time.

Wastewater Monitoring for Infectious Disease: Intentional Relationships between Academia, the Private Sector, and Local Health Departments for Public Health Preparedness

The public health emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic stimulated stakeholders from diverse disciplines and institutions to establish new collaborations to produce informed public health responses to the disease. Wastewater-based epidemiology for COVID-19 grew quickly during the pandemic and required the rapid implementation of such collaborations. The objective of this article is to describe the challenges and results of new relationships developed in Detroit, MI, USA among a medical school and an engineering college at an academic institution (Wayne State University), the local health department (Detroit Health Department), and an environmental services company (LimnoTech) to utilize markers of the COVID-19 virus, SARS-CoV-2, in wastewater for the goal of managing COVID-19 outbreaks. Our collaborative team resolved questions related to sewershed selection, communication of results, and public health responses and addressed technical challenges that included ground-truthing the sewer maps, overcoming supply chain issues, improving the speed and sensitivity of measurements, and training new personnel to deal with a new disease under pandemic conditions. Recognition of our complementary roles and clear communication among the partners enabled city-wide wastewater data to inform public health responses within a few months of the availability of funding in 2020, and to make improvements in sensitivity and understanding to be made as the pandemic progressed and evolved. As a result, the outbreaks of COVID-19 in Detroit in fall and winter 2021-2022 (corresponding to Delta and Omicron variant outbreaks) were tracked in 20 sewersheds. Data comparing community- and hospital-associated sewersheds indicate a one- to two-week advance warning in the community of subsequent peaks in viral markers in hospital sewersheds. The new institutional relationships impelled by the pandemic provide a good basis for continuing collaborations to utilize wastewater-based human and pathogen data for improving the public health in the future.

Into the "New Normal": The Ethical and Analytical Challenge Facing Public Health Post-COVID-19

Even though various countries' overall policy for dealing with the pandemic was not particularly innovative, the pandemic was perceived as a unique crisis. "COVID exceptionalism" has seemed to create "a new normal" that we all need to "learn to live with". The main change in perspective, while not new for public health experts, is that health exists within a social and political context. While public health ethics has turned out to be an important discipline, there is a long way to its wider acceptance. Entering the "new normal" calls for a wider embrace of public health approaches to ethics. The renewed emphasis on understanding health as a social concept encompasses central normative implications in relation to dealing with COVID-19 and in relation to dealing with other global crises, chiefly climate change. We argue that entering the era of "the new normal" in healthcare requires a nuanced understanding of the relationship between the individual and society and demands the formulation of a new system of bioethics focused on the concept of solidarity as a central value in public health. Such a concept should refer to the fact that in the "new normal", risks require new social and political formations of standing together in confronting risks that cross national, cultural, and identity borders. Forming and expanding solidarity in health and healthcare, we argue, is the main normative challenge for public health today.

Into the “New Normal”: The Ethical and Analytical Challenge Facing Public Health Post-COVID-19

Even though various countries’ overall policy for dealing with the pandemic was not particularly innovative, the pandemic was perceived as a unique crisis. “COVID exceptionalism” has seemed to create “a new normal” that we all need to “learn to live with”. The main change in perspective, while not new for public health experts, is that health exists within a social and political context. While public health ethics has turned out to be an important discipline, there is a long way to its wider acceptance. Entering the “new normal” calls for a wider embrace of public health approaches to ethics. The renewed emphasis on understanding health as a social concept encompasses central normative implications in relation to dealing with COVID-19 and in relation to dealing with other global crises, chiefly climate change. We argue that entering the era of “the new normal” in healthcare requires a nuanced understanding of the relationship between the individual and society and demands the formulation of a new system of bioethics focused on the concept of solidarity as a central value in public health. Such a concept should refer to the fact that in the “new normal”, risks require new social and political formations of standing together in confronting risks that cross national, cultural, and identity borders. Forming and expanding solidarity in health and healthcare, we argue, is the main normative challenge for public health today.

Perceived risk and vaccine hesitancy: Quasi-experimental evidence from Italy

In March 2021, Italian health authorities suspended the Vaxzevria vaccine (VA) for 4 days over reports of very rare blood disorders among recipients. We exploit the quasi-experimental setting arising from this break to study the drivers of vaccine hesitancy. Before the suspension, the VA vaccination trend followed the same pattern as Pfizer-Biontech (PB). After the suspension, VA and PB injections started to diverge, with VA daily decreasing by almost 60 doses per 100,000 inhabitants for the following 3 weeks. The resulting vaccination rate was 60 percent lower than the value that would have stemmed from the VA pre-suspension pattern. We show that the slowdown was weaker and less persistent in regions with higher COVID penetration and steadier and more pronounced in regions displaying greater attention to vaccine side effects as detected through Google searches. The public's interest in vaccine adverse events negatively correlates with COVID cases and deaths across regions.

How the COVID-19 Pandemic Impacted the Perception of Climate Change in the UK

The COVID-19 pandemic erupted during the climate change (CC) crisis, forcing individuals to adapt abruptly to a new scenario, and triggering changes in everyone’s lifestyles. Based on a sample of the UK population (N = 1013), this paper investigates how the COVID-19 pandemic invited/forced individuals to reflect upon a more sustainable way of life (which might be enhanced by the use of digital technologies for daily activities) and to (re)consider the anthropogenic impact on the environment. The results show that older individuals tend to be less sceptic around the human impact on CC. Other control variables such as income, gender and employment status have a limited impact on this attitude towards CC. Secondly, the findings indicate a clear separation between those with a minimal level of education, who support the natural origin of CC, while individuals with a higher level of education believe that CC is caused by human actions. Finally, on average, younger and more educated individuals tend to associate the COVID-19 pandemic with an opportunity to promote an eco-friendly world and to adopt an eco-sustainable approach.

Fostering participation in digital contact tracing

Digital contact tracing is a promising digital public health intervention to manage epidemics. However, in order to reach its full potential, the technology has to be widely adopted and used. During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, this has not necessarily been the case. We review the literature with a focus on how participation in digital contact tracing could be fostered and provide policy recommendations on how to increase its adoption and usage as well as recommendations for further research.

Willingness to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2: The role of reasoning biases and conspiracist ideation

BACKGR1OUND: Widespread vaccine hesitancy and refusal complicate containment of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Extant research indicates that biased reasoning and conspiracist ideation discourage vaccination. However, causal pathways from these constructs to vaccine hesitancy and refusal remain underspecified, impeding efforts to intervene and increase vaccine uptake.

METHOD

554 participants who denied prior SARS-CoV-2 vaccination completed self-report measures of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intentions, conspiracist ideation, and constructs from the Health Belief Model of medical decision-making (such as perceived vaccine dangerousness) along with tasks measuring reasoning biases (such as those concerning data gathering behavior). Cutting-edge machine learning algorithms (Greedy Fast Causal Inference) and psychometric network analysis were used to elucidate causal pathways to (and from) vaccine intentions.

RESULTS

Results indicated that a bias toward reduced data gathering during reasoning may cause paranoia, increasing the perceived dangerousness of vaccines and thereby reducing willingness to vaccinate. Existing interventions that target data gathering and paranoia therefore hold promise for encouraging vaccination. Additionally, reduced willingness to vaccinate was identified as a likely cause of belief in conspiracy theories, subverting the common assumption that the opposite causal relation exists. Finally, perceived severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection and perceived vaccine dangerousness (but not effectiveness) were potential direct causes of willingness to vaccinate, providing partial support for the Health Belief Model's applicability to SARS-CoV-2 vaccine decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

These insights significantly advance our understanding of the underpinnings of vaccine intentions and should scaffold efforts to prepare more effective interventions on hesitancy for deployment during future pandemics.

Persuasive messaging to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions

Widespread vaccination remains the best option for controlling the spread of COVID-19 and ending the pandemic. Despite the considerable disruption the virus has caused to people’s lives, many people are still hesitant to receive a vaccine. Without high rates of uptake, however, the pandemic is likely to be prolonged. Here we use two survey experiments to study how persuasive messaging affects COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions. In the first experiment, we test a large number of treatment messages. One subgroup of messages draws on the idea that mass vaccination is a collective action problem and highlighting the prosocial benefit of vaccination or the reputational costs that one might incur if one chooses not to vaccinate. Another subgroup of messages built on contemporary concerns about the pandemic, like issues of restricting personal freedom or economic security. We find that persuasive messaging that invokes prosocial vaccination and social image concerns is effective at increasing intended uptake and also the willingness to persuade others and judgments of non-vaccinators. We replicate this result on a nationally representative sample of Americans and observe that prosocial messaging is robust across subgroups, including those who are most hesitant about vaccines generally. The experiments demonstrate how persuasive messaging can induce individuals to be more likely to vaccinate and also create spillover effects to persuade others to do so as well.

The first experiment in this study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov and can be found under the ID number NCT04460703. This study was registered at Open Science Framework (OSF) at: https://osf.io/qu8nb/?view_only=82f06ecad77f4e54b02e8581a65047d7.

Monetary incentives increase COVID-19 vaccinations

The stalling of COVID-19 vaccination rates threatens public health. To increase vaccination rates, governments across the world are considering the use of monetary incentives. Here we present evidence about the effect of guaranteed payments on COVID-19 vaccination uptake. We ran a large preregistered randomized controlled trial (with 8286 participants) in Sweden and linked the data to population-wide administrative vaccination records. We found that modest monetary payments of 24 US dollars (200 Swedish kronor) increased vaccination rates by 4.2 percentage points (P = 0.005), from a baseline rate of 71.6%. By contrast, behavioral nudges increased stated intentions to become vaccinated but had only small and not statistically significant impacts on vaccination rates. The results highlight the potential of modest monetary incentives to raise vaccination rates.

Invincibility threatens vaccination intentions during a pandemic

Some people feel they are invincible to the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). They believe that being infected with COVID-19 would not be a serious threat to their health. While these people may or may not be correct in their personal risk assessment, we find that such perceived invincibility may undermine community efforts to achieve herd immunity. Multi-level analysis of survey respondents across 51 countries finds that perceived invincibility from COVID-19 is negatively associated with believing there is a need to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in one's community (n = 218,956) and one's willingness to inoculate against the disease (n = 71,148). These effects are most pronounced among individuals from countries lower in cultural collectivism (e.g., USA, UK, Canada) and highlight the need to consider the interplay of individual and cultural factors in our efforts to understand, predict, and promote preventative health behavior during a pandemic.

Game-theoretic modeling of collective decision making during epidemics

The spreading dynamics of an epidemic and the collective behavioral pattern of the population over which it spreads are deeply intertwined and the latter can critically shape the outcome of the former. Motivated by this, we design a parsimonious game-theoretic behavioral-epidemic model, in which an interplay of realistic factors shapes the coevolution of individual decision making and epidemics on a network. Although such a coevolution is deeply intertwined in the real world, existing models schematize population behavior as instantaneously reactive, thus being unable to capture human behavior in the long term. Our paradigm offers a unified framework to model and predict complex emergent phenomena, including successful collective responses, periodic oscillations, and resurgent epidemic outbreaks. The framework also allows us to provide analytical insights on the epidemic process and to assess the effectiveness of different policy interventions on ensuring a collective response that successfully eradicates the outbreak. Two case studies, inspired by real-world diseases, are presented to illustrate the potentialities of the proposed model.

Prosocial vaccination

Most vaccines not only directly protect vaccinated individuals but also provide a social benefit through community protection. Therefore, vaccination can be considered a prosocial act to protect others. We review the recent empirical evidence on (i) how prosocial concerns relate to vaccination intentions and (ii) promoting prosocial vaccination through explaining community protection or inducing concern for vulnerable others. The available evidence suggests that promoting the prosocial aspect of vaccinations could be a vaccination communication strategy to improve vaccine uptake. We point to several areas in which future research can test the boundary conditions of this approach and increase its effectiveness.

Protect ya Grandma! The Effects of Students' Epistemic Beliefs and Prosocial Values on COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions

The present study investigates epistemic beliefs (beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing) and prosocial values as predictors of COVID-19 vaccination intentions. As a first hypothesis, we posit that beliefs in justification by authority will positively relate to vaccination intentions. Second, we expect a positive relationship between prosocial values and vaccination intentions. Third, we hypothesize that beliefs in justification by authority moderate the relationship between prosocial values and vaccination intentions, so that the positive correlation between prosocial values and vaccination intentions becomes stronger with increasing beliefs in justification by authority. Hypotheses were tested in a sample of N = 314 German university students, a group with rather high mobility, who, when vaccinated, will increase the chance of attaining herd immunity. Hypotheses were tested using correlational and multiple regression analyses. Results revealed a highly significant positive relationship between justification by authority and vaccination intentions, whereas both hypotheses that included prosocial values did not yield significant results. Additional exploratory analyses revealed that the relationship between justification by authority and vaccination intentions was mediated by beliefs in the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines. Furthermore, significant negative relationships were found between personal justification and vaccination intentions as well as between justification by multiple sources and vaccination intentions. These results highlight the crucial role of science and public health communication in fostering vaccination intentions regarding COVID-19.

A Select Bibliography of Actions to Promote Vaccine Literacy: A Resource for Health Communication

In this bibliography, the researchers provide an introduction to the available evidence base of actions to promote vaccine literacy. The research team organized interventions to create a tool that can inform health communicators and practitioners seeking a resource focused on strategy and implementation design for actions that support vaccine literacy. This scoping bibliography is honed specifically to respond to the urgency of the current pandemic, when supporting and increasing vaccine literacy offers promise for achieving the critically needed high levels of vaccination. Over the course of the coming months and year, this bibliography will be a dynamic and "living" document hosted and maintained on vaccineliteracy.com.