Understanding the phases of vaccine hesitancy during the COVID-19 pandemic

From vaccine hesitancy to vaccine motivation: A motivational interviewing based approach to vaccine counselling

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted Vaccine Hesitancy (VH) as an accelerating global phenomenon that must be addressed. According to the WHO, thirty to fifty percent of the world's population are VH. Motivational Interviewing (MI) is an evidence-based communication style demonstrated to significantly reduce VH. MI guides people toward change through the expression of empathy and by respecting an individual's autonomy. Healthcare providers (HCPs) are the primary implementors of vaccine policies and the most trusted advisors and influencers of vaccination intention at the individual patient level. Training HCPs in MI is one of the most effective strategies to overcome VH. Many countries are currently implementing HCP training programs and population-based MI interventions to improve vaccine uptake. MI conversations are 'the heart' of vaccine decision-making processes. Understanding individual patient-level drivers of hesitancy allows clinicians to efficiently provide tailored, accurate information that reinforces a person's own motivation and confidence in their own decision. This paper describes a 4-step practical framework designed to support HCPs in their dialogue with vaccine-hesitant patients. (1) Engaging to establish a trustful relationship and safety to freely express opinions, beliefs, and knowledge gaps; (2) Understanding what matters most to the individual; (3) Offering Information to co-build accurate knowledge in order to guide the individual toward vaccine intention (4) Clarifying and Accepting to validate an individual's decision-making autonomy. We believe that our pragmatic approach can contribute to greater acceptability of COVID-19 and other vaccines, and enable rapid deployment of practical MI skills across care systems.

Assessing New York City's COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout Strategy: A Case for Risk-Informed Distribution

This study reviews the impact of eligibility policies in the early rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine on coverage and probable outcomes, with a focus on New York City. We conducted a retrospective ecological study assessing age  65+, area-level income, vaccination coverage, and COVID-19 mortality rates, using linked Census Bureau data and New York City Health administrative data aggregated at the level of modified zip code tabulation areas (MODZCTA). The population for this study was all individuals in 177 MODZCTA in New York City. Population data were obtained from Census Bureau and New York City Health administrative data. The total mortality rate was examined through an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression model, using area-level wealth, the proportion of the population aged 65 and above, and the vaccination rate among this age group as predictors. Low-income areas with high proportions of older people demonstrated lower coverage rates (mean vaccination rate 52.8%; maximum coverage 67.9%) than wealthier areas (mean vaccination rate 74.6%; maximum coverage 99% in the wealthiest quintile) in the first 3 months of vaccine rollout and higher mortality over the year. Despite vaccine shortages, many younger people accessed vaccines ahead of schedule, particularly in high-income areas (mean coverage rate 60% among those 45-64 years in the wealthiest quintile). A vaccine program that prioritized those at greatest risk of COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality would have prevented more deaths than the strategy that was implemented. When rolling out a new vaccine, policymakers must account for local contexts and conditions of high-risk population groups. If New York had focused limited vaccine supply on low-income areas with high proportions of residents 65 or older, overall mortality might have been lower.

Are we really hesitant toward routine immunization: Findings from a cross-sectional study in urban area in the tribal dominant state of India

Background

Vaccine hesitancy has been inching up and its root cause lies in the factors that influence the vaccination. The present study was conducted to find out the proportion and factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy for routine childhood vaccinations in the slum population.

Methods

A community-based cross-sectional study was carried out among 210 children between the age group of 0 and 59 months residing in the urban slums of Ranchi in 2021. Data were collected during the household visit by interviewing the parents using a predesigned pretested interview schedule which was developed based on the validated version of the vaccine hesitancy survey questionnaire originally developed by the World Health Organization Strategic Advisory Group of Experts' working group on vaccine hesitancy. Associations between variables were analyzed using logistic regression.

Results

A total of 210 children whose parents had given consent were included in our study. The majority of the families, 188 (89.5%), were not hesitant while only 22 (10.5%) were vaccine hesitant. Tribal children and unreserved category children had adjusted odds ratio of 4.41 (95% CI, 1.61-45.46) and 7.75 (95% CI, 1.07-56.08) for the delay as against their reference category.

Conclusions

Most of the children were vaccinated in our study area and the families have shown confidence in vaccines. Although there were delays in vaccination and the reasons for the delays must be addressed to prevent these vaccine-hesitant populations from turning into vaccine-refusal population. Uniformity in vaccination days in different health facilities in slum areas, appropriate antenatal information, and counseling regarding childhood vaccinations, widespread awareness, and improving mother's education can help address the issue of vaccine hesitancy.

Healthcare workers' perceptions and acceptance for COVID-19 vaccine for their children aged <18 years from the Region of Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination program among adults in India is one of the highly successful vaccination drives globally, but the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine among parents for their children is largely unknown. As parents are primary decision-makers for their children, we aimed to assess parents' perceptions and acceptance for COVID-19 vaccination for children in India.

Aim

To assess parental perceptions and acceptance for COVID-19 vaccination for their children (aged <18 years).

Materials and Methods

A cross-sectional anonymous web-based survey was designed and conducted from November 1 to December 15, 2022. All the healthcare workers of a tertiary care institute in eastern Uttar Pradesh, having a child aged <18 years, constituted the study population and were invited. They were recruited through snowball sampling and were sent the study questionnaire in Google form through email and WhatsApp. Bivariate analysis was performed to determine the predictors of child vaccination acceptance among the parents.

Results

A total of 388 healthcare worker parents (HCWPs) having a child <18 years of age completed the survey. The mean age of the parents was 40.28 ± 11.34 years. The majority (96.9%) of them had already received the recommended two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. Around 91% of the parents agreed that COVID-19 vaccines are important for children's health, whereas 89% agreed that COVID-19 vaccines are effective. A total of 356 (91.7%) parents were willing to vaccinate their children with a COVID-19 vaccine, of which 91.3% intended to do so as soon as possible. The factors significantly associated with the stated willingness for child vaccination among the participants were younger age (P = 0.008), female gender (P = 0000), currently married status (P = 0.00001), urban residence (P = 0.01), lower monthly income (P = 0.03), absence of any chronic illness (P = 0.0003), history of COVID-19 in the child (P = 0.004), and the child being up-to-date with the routine childhood vaccines (P = 0.01).

Conclusion

The HCWPs from eastern Uttar Pradesh, India, have a positive attitude and low vaccine hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccination for children, with around 92% currently willing to vaccinate their children with COVID vaccine. Further longitudinal studies are required to assess the trend of parental acceptance of COVID vaccine.

Vaccine rhetoric on social media and COVID-19 vaccine uptake rates: A triangulation using self-reported vaccine acceptance

The primary goal of this study is to examine the association between vaccine rhetoric on Twitter and the public's uptake rates of COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, compared to the extent of an association between self-reported vaccine acceptance and the CDC's uptake rates. We downloaded vaccine-related posts on Twitter in real-time daily for 13 months, from October 2021 to September 2022, collecting over half a billion tweets. A previously validated deep-learning algorithm was then applied to (1) filter out irrelevant tweets and (2) group the remaining relevant tweets into pro-, anti-, and neutral vaccine sentiments. Our results indicate that the tweet counts (combining all three sentiments) were significantly correlated with the uptake rates of all stages of COVID-19 shots (p < 0.01). The self-reported level of vaccine acceptance was not correlated with any of the stages of COVID-19 shots (p > 0.05) but with the daily new infection counts. These results suggest that although social media posts on vaccines may not represent the public's opinions, they are aligned with the public's behaviors of accepting vaccines, which is an essential step for developing interventions to increase the uptake rates. In contrast, self-reported vaccine acceptance represents the public's opinions, but these were not correlated with the behaviors of accepting vaccines. These outcomes provide empirical support for the validity of social media analytics for gauging the public's vaccination behaviors and understanding a nuanced perspective of the public's vaccine sentiment for health emergencies.

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance: The Role of Trust and the Influence of Social Media

The study discusses the predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in Romania. We implemented a national survey using an online panel (N = 1006), representative for the online population of Romania aged 18 or higher, conducted on 13-26 October, 2020, by the national pollster QUESTIA. Results show a predictive model of people's willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine, in which trust in the actors and institutions involved in the management of the crisis is the strongest predictor, followed by the belief in toxic or misleading narratives about vaccines and the COVID-19 pandemic, and media consumption patterns. Education is a moderator of the relationship between trust and the willingness to vaccinate. Implications for professionals in the social work fields, as well as for policy-makers are discussed. Results could be used as a starting point for developing recommendations for evidence-based health communication in the context of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Patients Recovered From COVID-19 Infection in Wuhan, China: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study

BACKGROUND

Although patients recovered from COVID-19 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 over time. Vaccination is associated with efficacious protection against COVID-19 infection and could boost infection-acquired immunity; however, various COVID-19 survivors have not been vaccinated due to vaccine hesitancy.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and related factors among COVID-19 survivors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted among patients who recovered from COVID-19 infection in Wuhan, China, between June 10 and July 25, 2021. The questionnaire included sociodemographic information, items on COVID-19 infection, the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale based on the 3Cs (complacency, convenience, and confidence) model, trust in vaccine manufacturers and health facilities, and reasons for the decision to accept COVID-19 vaccination. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to assess the factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

RESULTS

Among the 1422 participants, 538 (37.8%) were not vaccinated against COVID-19. The COVID-19-recovered patients who self-reported having a current unhealthy status expressed more hesitancy about the COVID-19 vaccine than those who perceived themselves to be healthy (odds ratio [OR] 0.45, 95% CI 0.28-0.71). Compared to the asymptomatic patients, patients with mild symptoms were more likely to receive a COVID-19 vaccine (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.02-2.82). Regarding the 3Cs model, high complacency (P=.005) and low convenience (P=.004) were significant negative factors for COVID-19 vaccination. 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, whereas "already have antibodies and do not need vaccination" was the main reason for patients to not receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the three major factors of vaccine hesitancy, complacency proved to be the most notable among COVID-19-recovered patients. Therefore, educational campaigns can focus on raising the awareness of risk of infection and the benefits of vaccination to reduce complacency toward vaccination among this population. In particular, for individuals who have recovered from COVID-19, improving factors related to convenience such as transportation, the environment of vaccination, and providing door-to-door service was also deemed necessary to facilitate their vaccination. In addition, addressing the concerns about vaccination of COVID-19-recovered patients could foster trust and promote their uptake of vaccination.

Unintended consequences of communicating rapid COVID-19 vaccine policy changes- a qualitative study of health policy communication in Ontario, Canada

BACKGROUND

The success of the COVID-19 vaccination roll-out depended on clear policy communication and guidance to promote and facilitate vaccine uptake. The rapidly evolving pandemic circumstances led to many vaccine policy amendments. The impact of changing policy on effective vaccine communication and its influence in terms of societal response to vaccine promotion are underexplored; this qualitative research addresses that gap within the extant literature.

METHODS

Policy communicators and community leaders from urban and rural Ontario participated in semi-structured interviews (N = 29) to explore their experiences of COVID-19 vaccine policy communication. Thematic analysis was used to produce representative themes.

RESULTS

Analysis showed rapidly changing policy was a barrier to smooth communication and COVID-19 vaccine roll-out. Continual amendments had unintended consequences, stimulating confusion, disrupting community outreach efforts and interrupting vaccine implementation. Policy changes were most disruptive to logistical planning and community engagement work, including community outreach, communicating eligibility criteria, and providing translated vaccine information to diverse communities.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccine policy changes that allow for prioritized access can have the unintended consequence of limiting communities' access to information that supports decision making. Rapidly evolving circumstances require a balance between adjusting policy and maintaining simple, consistent public health messages that can readily be translated into action. Information access is a factor in health inequality that needs addressing alongside access to vaccines.

Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccines in India: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to evaluate the acceptability levels for COVID vaccine(s) in various states in India. Published articles in PubMed/Scopus/Cochrane/DOAJ/the Web of Science that focused on assessing COVID-19 vaccine hesitation/vaccine acceptance using a survey/questionnaire were included. After extensive research, 524 records were found, and after screening on the basis of eligibility criteria, only 23 papers were added to this review. Increased vaccine assumption percentage (>70%) among the population was found in two surveys nationwide (92.8%) and in Delhi (79.5%). For pooled estimates of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and heterogeneity, twenty-three studies (23) consisting of 39,567 individuals reported for acceptance of COVID 19 vaccine in India.. Out of these, 26,028 individuals accepted the COVID-19 vaccine, giving a pooled estimate of 62.6% (95% CI: 55.6-69.4) with considerable heterogeneity (χ² = 3397.3, p < 0.0001; I² = 99.40%). The results of this study give a brief insight into the percentage acceptance and hesitancy among the Indian population regarding COVID-19 vaccine immunisation. Future research and vaccine education initiatives can be steered by the findings of this work as a starting point.

Previous Vaccination History and Psychological Factors as Significant Predictors of Willingness to Receive Mpox Vaccination and a Favorable Attitude towards Compulsory Vaccination

During the ongoing multi-country monkeypox (Mpox) outbreak, healthcare workers (HCWs) have represented a key group in mitigating disease spread. The current study aimed to evaluate the attitude of nurses and physicians in Jordan towards Mpox vaccination, as well as their attitude towards compulsory vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), influenza, and Mpox. An online survey was distributed in January 2023 based on the previously validated 5C scale for psychological determinants of vaccination. Previous vaccination behavior was assessed by inquiring about the history of getting the primary and booster COVID-19 vaccination, influenza vaccine uptake during COVID-19, and any history of influenza vaccine uptake. The study sample consisted of 495 respondents: nurses (n = 302, 61.0%) and physicians (n = 193, 39.0%). Four hundred and thirty respondents (86.9%) had heard of Mpox before the study, and formed the final sample considered for Mpox knowledge analysis. Deficiencies in Mpox knowledge were reflected in a mean knowledge score of 13.3 ± 2.7 (out of 20.0 as the maximum score), with significantly lower knowledge among nurses and females. The intention to receive Mpox vaccination was reported by 28.9% of the participants (n = 143), while 33.3% were hesitant (n = 165), and 37.8% were resistant (n = 187). In multivariate analysis, Mpox vaccine acceptance was significantly associated with previous vaccination behavior, reflected in higher vaccine uptake and with higher 5C scores, while Mpox knowledge was not correlated with Mpox vaccination intention. The overall attitude towards compulsory vaccination was neutral, while a favorable attitude towards compulsory vaccination was associated with higher 5C scores and a history of previous vaccination uptake. The current study showed a low intention to get Mpox vaccination in a sample of nurses and physicians practicing in Jordan. The psychological factors and previous vaccination behavior appeared as the most significant determinants of Mpox vaccine acceptance and of attitudes towards compulsory vaccination. The consideration of these factors is central to policies and strategies aiming to promote vaccination among health professionals in efforts to prepare for future infectious disease epidemics.

Rational and irrational vaccine hesitancy

In the paper published recently in this journal, Kumar et al. explained why the key to improved COVID-19 vaccine uptake is to understand societal reactions leading to vaccine hesitancy. They conclude that communications strategies should be tailored to the different phases of vaccine hesitancy. However, within the theoretical framework provided in their paper, vaccine hesitancy should be recognized as having both rational and irrational components. Rational vaccine hesitancy is a natural result of the inherent uncertainties in the potential impact of vaccines in controlling the pandemic. In general, irrational hesitancy is based on baseless information obtained from hearsay and deliberately false information. Risk communication should address both with transparent, evidence-based information. Rational concerns can be allayed by sharing the process in which dilemmas and uncertainties are dealt with by the health authorities. Messages on irrational concerns need to address head on the sources spreading unscientific and unsound information. In both cases, there is a need to develop risk communication that restores trust in the health authorities.

Herding behavior in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in rural Zimbabwe: The moderating role of health information under heterogeneous household risk perceptions

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy poses a global health threat by potentially delaying the attainment of herd immunity to attenuate infection and transmission. Most governments across the world are engrossed with formulating strategies to surmount conservative group behavior such as vaccine hesitancy typical under risky and uncertain situations such as in the case of COVID-19. This paper examines herding behavior in vaccine hesitancy with a special focus on the moderating role of household access to health information from village health workers under different risk perceptions. We use the 2021 Zimbabwe Vulnerability Assessment Committee cross-section household national survey consisting of 13, 583 valid observations. Our major findings indicate that herding behavior plays a role in rural households' hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccine inoculation. Furthermore, whilst access to health information from village health workers reduces herding behavior in vaccine hesitancy, it does so more when the household perceives itself to be at high risk of contracting COVID-19. Analysing herding behavior in vaccine hesitancy can help policymakers develop more targeted vaccination strategies, such as promoting access to health information through channels like village health workers, especially for households at high risk of contracting COVID-19.

Vaccinated Yet Booster-Hesitant: Perspectives from Boosted, Non-Boosted, and Unvaccinated Individuals

Though available for all age groups in the US, only about half of those vaccinated have obtained a COVID-19 booster. Similar to the unvaccinated, those vaccinated-but-not-boosted may reduce the effectiveness of widespread viral protection. Booster hesitancy differs from general vaccine hesitancy yet remains less researched. We examined booster perceptions across vaccination status using qualitative methodologies. Four focus groups and 11 individual interviews (total n = 32) revealed nuanced changes and differences compared to the first-dose decision. Booster hesitancy stemmed from questions and surprises. Most vaccinated participants accepted the booster, though to varying degrees: enthusiastically with feelings of appreciation and added confidence, passively as an intuitive next step, indifferently following recommendation-"primed" by the yearly flu shot, and reluctantly with worries. The vaccinated-but-not-boosted group expressed confusion about the need for a new shot and discontentment as to why it was not communicated from the start, which coincided with their uncertainty about ending the pandemic. Inadvertently, booster recommendations further polarized non-vaccinated participants, augmenting their skepticism of the original dosages' efficacy or necessity and intensifying their distrust of the government. The findings illuminate the need for adjusting vaccination promotions to better tailor communications (e.g., distinguishing its benefits from the first vaccine and emphasizing the continued risk of COVID-19 spread). Future researchers should further explore the vaccine-accepting-yet-booster-hesitant groups' motivations and risk perceptions to reduce booster rejection.

Intention to Vaccinate against COVID-19 among Young Adults: The Role of Conspiratorial Thinking

The anti-scientific and anti-vaccine movements gained momentum amidst the health and socio-economic crisis brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. These widespread pseudoscientific beliefs and the endorsement of conspiracy theories likely contributed to the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The aim of this study was to explore which variables best differentiated between groups of vaccinated (n = 289), vaccine-hesitant (n = 106), and vaccine-refusing (n = 146) young adults. The study was conducted online at the beginning of the mass vaccination campaign in Croatia when the vaccine just became available for younger and non-vulnerable members of the general population. The demographic variables, COVID-19 anxiety, and conspiratorial thinking regarding COVID-19 were entered into the discriminant analysis. The function explaining 89.2% of the group differences, mostly between the vaccinated and vaccine-refusing, was largely defined by conspiratorial thinking regarding COVID-19 (0.852), followed by variables with substantially less discriminative power, including COVID-19 anxiety (0.423; lower in the vaccine-refusing group), political orientation (0.486; vaccine-refusing leaning less to the left), financial and educational status (0.435 and 0.304, respectively; both lower in the vaccine-refusing group), and religiosity (0.301; higher in the vaccine-refusing group). These results confirm that among young adults, the decision to vaccinate against COVID-19 might be heavily influenced by one's proclivity to engage in conspiratorial thinking.

COVID-19 vaccination refusal trends in Kenya over 2021

BACKGROUND

Vaccination refusal exacerbates global COVID-19 vaccination inequities. No studies in East Africa have examined temporal trends in vaccination refusal, precluding addressing refusal. We assessed vaccine refusal over time in Kenya, and characterized factors associated with changes in vaccination refusal.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the Kenya Rapid Response Phone Survey (RRPS), a household cohort survey representative of the Kenyan population including refugees. Vaccination refusal (defined as the respondent stating they would not receive the vaccine if offered to them at no cost) was measured in February and October 2021. Proportions of vaccination refusal were plotted over time. We analyzed factors in vaccination refusal using a weighted multivariable logistic regression including interactions for time.

FINDINGS

Among 11,569 households, vaccination refusal in Kenya decreased from 24 % in February 2021 to 9 % in October 2021. Vaccination refusal was associated with having education beyond the primary level (-4.1[-0.7,-8.9] percentage point difference (ppd)); living with somebody who had symptoms of COVID-19 in the past 14 days (-13.72[-8.9,-18.6]ppd); having symptoms of COVID-19 in the past 14 days (11.0[5.1,16.9]ppd); and distrusting the government in responding to COVID-19 (14.7[7.1,22.4]ppd). There were significant interactions with time and: refugee status and geography, living with somebody with symptoms of COVID-19, having symptoms of COVID-19, and believing in misinformation.

INTERPRETATION

The temporal reduction in vaccination refusal in Kenya likely represents substantial strides by the Kenyan vaccination program and possible learnt lessons which require examination. Going forward, there are still several groups which need specific targeting to decrease vaccination refusal and improve vaccination equity, including those with lower levels of education, those with recent COVID-19 symptoms, those who do not practice personal COVID-19 mitigation measures, refugees in urban settings, and those who do not trust the government. Policy and program should focus on decreasing vaccination refusal in these populations, and research focus on understanding barriers and motivators for vaccination.

Proposing a New Conceptual Syndemic Framework for COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Discussions regarding syndemics have dominated research in recent years. Vaccine hesitancy has also been propelled to the forefront. In this narrative review, we aim to frame a novel syndemic framework to understand the interaction between vaccine hesitancy, COVID-19, and negative health outcomes.

METHODS

A non-systematic electronic search was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar. Search criteria were limited to articles published between November 2019 and June 2022. Articles related to the COVID-19 syndemic and vaccine hesitancy were included.

RESULTS

Our review revealed that the adherence to COVID-19 regulations-although they were effective in preventing COVID-19 transmission, cases, and deaths-created a dynamically unstable 'vicious cycle' between undesirable health, economic, and social outcomes. The "accumulation" of complex stressors decreased individuals' cognitive flexibility and hindered them from making decisions and getting vaccinated. Furthermore, it increased individuals' risk of acquiring COVID-19, losing their employment, increasing poverty, and decreasing healthcare utilization. We illustrated how the amalgamation of sociodemographic and contextual factors associated with COVID-19 might impact people's vaccine decisions, making them more hesitant toward COVID-19 vaccination. Failing to receive vaccinations increases the chances of COVID-19 transmission, hospitalization, and other negative health outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the interaction between these factors is essential to provide policymakers with inspiration to set appropriate interventions for promoting COVID-19 vaccination acceptance to decrease the overall burden of pandemics.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Medicare Beneficiaries with and Without Cancer History: A US Population-based Study

Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Medicare beneficiaries is critical for increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the US. This study aimed to estimate and compare the vaccine hesitancy rate among community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries with and without cancer history, also to investigate factors associated with vaccine hesitancy during the first four months after COVID-19 vaccine became available. We used population-based, cross-sectional data on 3,034 community-living Medicare beneficiaries from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey COVID-19 Winter 2021 Supplement. Sample weights were applied to account for the complex survey design with results generalizable to 16.4 million Medicare beneficiaries. Weighted multivariable logistic regression model was conducted to investigate the association between cancer history and vaccine hesitancy adjusting for covariates. A total of 39.6% were hesitant about getting COVID-19 vaccine. Those with cancer history were significantly less likely to be hesitant to get vaccinated than those without cancer history (adjusted odds ratio = 0.80, 95% confidence interval: 0.64, 0.99, p = .050). The most common reason for being hesitant to get COVID-19 vaccine was that the vaccine could have side effects or was viewed as not safe (19.2%), followed by not trusting what government says about vaccine (11.4%). Those with cancer history were more likely to report ongoing health conditions, lack of recommendation from a doctor, and doctor recommending against COVID-19 vaccination as reasons for not getting the vaccine compared to participants without cancer history. Increasing the confidence and knowledge about vaccine benefits among high-risk and more hesitant individuals are urgently needed to increase the vaccine uptake.

Drivers of the Intention to Receive a COVID-19 Booster Vaccine: Insights from the UK and Australia

As the global pandemic perpetuates, keeping the population vaccinated will be imperative to maintain societal protection from the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) virus. However, while empirical evidence regarding predictors of the intention to receive a first COVID-19 vaccine has amassed, our understanding regarding the psychological and behavioral drivers of continued COVID-19 vaccination remains limited. In this pre-registered study (UK: AsPredicted#78370|Australia: AsPredicted#81667), factors predicting the intention to receive a COVID-19 booster vaccine were investigated in two adult samples from the UK (N = 1222) and Australia (N = 1197) that were nationally representative on factors of age, gender, and geographic location. High levels of booster intent were found (73% and 67%, respectively). Exploratory Structural Equation Modelling (ESEM) revealed three key predictors of the intention to receive a booster vaccine that emerged across both UK and Australian samples: concern regarding the COVID-19 virus, positive perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccines, and the perceived severity of side effects experienced to the last COVID-19 vaccine dose. Several additional factors (age, months since the last COVID-19 vaccine, familiarity with side effects, and regularly receiving the influenza vaccine) were present in the Australian dataset. These findings provide important evidence that targeting psychological perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and virus may serve to maintain participation in the COVID-19 vaccination programme, paving the way for future behavioural research in this area.

Improving preparedness for next pandemics: Max level of COVID-19 vaccinations without social impositions to design effective health policy and avoid flawed democracies

In the presence of pandemic threats, such as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis, vaccination is one of the fundamental strategies to cope with negative effects of new viral agents in society. The rollout of vast vaccination campaigns also generates the main issue of hesitancy and resistance to vaccines in a share of people. Many studies have investigated how to reduce the social resistance to vaccinations, however the maximum level of vaccinable people against COVID-19 (and in general against pandemic diseases), without coercion in countries, is unknown. The goal of this study is to solve the problem here by developing an empirical analysis, based on global data, to estimate the max share of people vaccinable in relation to socioeconomic wellbeing of nations. Results, based on 150 countries, reveal that vaccinations increase with the income per capita, achieving the maximum share of about 70% of total population, without coercion. This information can provide new knowledge to establish the appropriate goal of vaccination campaigns and in general of health policies to cope with next pandemic impacts, without restrictions that create socioeconomic problems. Overall, then, nations have a natural level of max vaccinable people (70% of population), but strict policies and mandates to achieve 90% of vaccinated population can reduce the quality of democracy and generate socioeconomic issues higher than (pandemic) crisis.

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).