The changing vaccine landscape: rates of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in young adults during vaccine rollout

The invisible burden of managing COVID-19 for Australian women: Cognitive labor and public health information

Providing accurate and timely public health information is an ongoing challenge for public health officials. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated such challenges and presented unique difficulties in providing public health information, through the parallel rise of an "infodemic" of mis/dis-information. Understanding why individuals select, use and change their public health information seeking behaviors around COVID-19, and the relationship of these decisions relative to participant characteristics, is therefore an important step in understanding and responding to infodemics. This study used a qualitative survey (n = 255) and free-text qualitative questions to ask (1) Why participants use an information source, (2) How participants used an information source, and (3) How information seeking behavior has changed since the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were primarily women, born in Australia, with de-facto/married relationships, without children at home, with university/college qualifications, and employed full-time or unemployed/retired. Most participants identified "easiness" and "immediacy" as reasons why they chose and used information, with sources primarily used for planning, communication, and decision making. A minority of participants changed their information seeking behavior since the COVID-19 pandemic. Those who did change, desired more immediate and accurate information. Emergent themes of care and anxiety were also noted, raising questions around the impact of mental load and cognitive labor in some female populations. Women may be suffering from increased cognitive labor and a gendering of public health information seeking behavior in the context of COVID-19. The impact of these attributes on women requires greater empirical research and consideration amongst front line practitioners and public health professionals.

Cross-Sectional Study of University Students’ Attitudes to ‘On Campus’ Delivery of COVID-19, MenACWY and MMR Vaccines and Future-Proofing Vaccine Roll-Out Strategies

University students are a critical group for vaccination programmes against COVID-19, meningococcal disease (MenACWY) and measles, mumps and rubella (MMR). We aimed to evaluate risk factors for vaccine hesitancy and views about on-campus vaccine delivery among university students. Data were obtained through a cross-sectional anonymous online questionnaire study of undergraduate students in June 2021 and analysed by univariate and multivariate tests to detect associations. Complete data were obtained from 827 participants (7.6% response-rate). Self-reporting of COVID-19 vaccine status indicated uptake by two-thirds (64%; 527/827), willing for 23% (194/827), refusal by 5% (40/827) and uncertain results for 8% (66/827). Hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccines was 5% (40/761). COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was associated with Black ethnicity (aOR, 7.01, 95% CI, 1.8–27.3) and concerns about vaccine side-effects (aOR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.23–2.39). Uncertainty about vaccine status was frequently observed for MMR (11%) and MenACWY (26%) vaccines. Campus-associated COVID-19 vaccine campaigns were favoured by UK-based students (definitely, 45%; somewhat, 16%) and UK-based international students (definitely, 62%; somewhat, 12%). Limitations of this study were use of use of a cross-sectional approach, self-selection of the response cohort, slight biases in the demographics and a strict definition of vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy and uncertainty about vaccine status are concerns for effective vaccine programmes. Extending capabilities of digital platforms for accessing vaccine information and sector-wide implementation of on-campus vaccine delivery are strategies for improving vaccine uptake among students. Future studies of vaccine hesitancy among students should aim to extend our observations to student populations in a wider range of university settings and with broader definitions of vaccine hesitancy.

Attitudes toward COVID-19 Vaccination on Social Media: A Cross-Platform Analysis

During the COVID-19 pandemic, social media content analysis allowed for tracking attitudes toward newly introduced vaccines. However, current evidence is limited to single social media platforms. Our objective was to compare arguments used by anti-vaxxers in the context of COVID-19 vaccines across Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok. We obtained the data set of 53,671 comments regarding COVID-19 vaccination published between August 2021 and February 2022. After that, we established categories of anti-vaccine content, manually classified comments, and compared the frequency of occurrence of the categories between social media platforms. We found that anti-vaxxers on social media use 14 categories of arguments against COVID-19 vaccines. The frequency of these categories varies across different social media platforms. The anti-vaxxers' activity on Facebook and Twitter is similar, focusing mainly on distrust of government and allegations regarding vaccination safety and effectiveness. Anti-vaxxers on TikTok mainly focus on personal freedom, while Instagram users encouraging vaccination often face criticism suggesting that vaccination is a private matter that should not be shared. Due to the differences in vaccine sentiment among users of different social media platforms, future research and educational campaigns should consider these distinctions, focusing more on the platforms popular among adolescents (i.e., Instagram and TikTok).

Social Media News Use Induces COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Through Skepticism Regarding Its Efficacy: A Longitudinal Study From the United States

There are mounting concerns about the adverse effects of social media on the public understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic and its potential effects on vaccination coverage. Yet early studies have focused on generic social media use and been based on cross-sectional data limiting any causal inferences. This study is among the first to provide causal support for the speculation that social media news use leads to vaccine hesitancy among US citizens. This two-wave survey study was conducted in the US using Qualtrics online panel-based recruitment. We employ mediation and moderated mediation analyses to test our assumptions. The results suggest that using social media to consume news content can translate into vaccine hesitancy by increasing citizens' skepticism regarding the efficacy of vaccines. However, these effects are contingent upon the news literacy of users, as the effects on vaccine hesitancy are more substantial among those with lower news literacy. The current study recommends to public policymakers and vaccine communication strategists that any attempt to reduce vaccine hesitancy in society should factor in the adverse effects of social media news use that can increase vaccine safety concerns.