Impact of educational interventions on adolescent attitudes and knowledge regarding vaccination: A pilot study

One Health education for criticality on vaccination in teacher training

Introduction

Vaccines are the basis of health of our communities since they prevent severe infectious diseases. However vaccination rates continue to decrease due to the spread of misinformation about their side effects, which enhances vaccine hesitancy and puts at risk public health. Introducing vaccines from the One Health approach can help to develop an integral understanding of their role and to apply critical ignorance as part of criticality to avoid vaccine hesitancy and raise trust in science. This paper presents a design on vaccination for secondary-education teacher training developed toward this goal.

Methods

The design presented in this paper draws from previous studies on critical thinking, on vaccine rejection, and the One Health approach on other health issues in Secondary Education. The focus of this design is engaging secondary-education pre-service teachers in the practice of critical ignorance and criticality to assess diverse pieces of information on vaccination from the One Health approach.

Results

This study discusses the design principles and the activities of an original design that aims to provide Secondary Education teachers with some tools to introduce critical ignorance and criticality for addressing misinformation on vaccines by using the One Health approach.

Discussion

If secondary science teachers are going to successfully confront misinformation on vaccination in their science instruction, we need to develop and test designs and approaches that prepare them for this purpose. Critical ignorance plays a central role in managing misinformation; thus, such instruction should engage future teachers in critical evaluation of information on vaccination, as well as in the application of the One Health approach to take responsible actions.

Digital Gamification Tools to Enhance Vaccine Uptake: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Behavioral interventions for vaccination uptake: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Human behavior and more specifically behavioral insight-based approaches to vaccine uptake have often been overlooked. While there have been a few narrative reviews indexed in Medline on behavioral interventions to increase vaccine uptake, to our knowledge, none have been systematic reviews and meta-analyses covering not just high but also low-and-middle income countries.

METHODS

We included 613 studies from the Medline database in our systematic review and meta-analysis categorizing different behavioral interventions in 9 domains: education campaigns, on-site vaccination, incentives, free vaccination, institutional recommendation, provider recommendation, reminder and recall, message framing, and vaccine champion. Additionally, considering that there is variability in the acceptance of vaccines among different populations, we assessed studies from both high-income countries (HICs) and low- to middle-income countries (LMICs), separately.

FINDINGS

Our results showed that behavioral interventions can considerably improve vaccine uptake in most settings. All domains that we examined improved vaccine uptake with the highest effect size associated with provider recommendation (OR: 3.4 (95%CI: 2.5-4.6); Domain: motivation) and on-site vaccination (OR: 2.9 (95%CI: 2.3-3.7); Domain: practical issues). While the number of studies conducted in LMICs was smaller, the quality of studies was similar with those conducted in HICs. Nevertheless, there were variations in the observed effect sizes.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings indicate that "provider recommendation" and "on-site vaccination" along with other behavioral interventions can be employed to increase vaccination rates globally.

A systematic review of interventions to promote HPV vaccination globally

BACKGROUND

Despite the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine being a safe, effective cancer prevention method, its uptake is suboptimal in the United States (U.S.). Previous research has found a variety of intervention strategies (environmental and behavioral) to increase its uptake. The purpose of the study is to systematically review the literature on interventions that promote HPV vaccination from 2015 to 2020.

METHODS

We updated a systematic review of interventions to promote HPV vaccine uptake globally. We ran keyword searches in six bibliographic databases. Target audience, design, level of intervention, components and outcomes were abstracted from the full-text articles in Excel databases.

RESULTS

Of the 79 articles, most were conducted in the U.S. (72.2%) and in clinical (40.5%) or school settings (32.9%), and were directed at a single level (76.3%) of the socio-ecological model. Related to the intervention type, most were informational (n = 25, 31.6%) or patient-targeted decision support (n = 23, 29.1%). About 24% were multi-level interventions, with 16 (88.9%) combining two levels. Twenty-seven (33.8%) reported using theory in intervention development. Of those reporting HPV vaccine outcomes, post-intervention vaccine initiation ranged from 5% to 99.2%, while series completion ranged from 6.8% to 93.0%. Facilitators to implementation were the use of patient navigators and user-friendly resources, while barriers included costs, time to implement and difficulties of integrating interventions into the organizational workflow.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a strong need to expand the implementation of HPV-vaccine promotion interventions beyond education alone and at a single level of intervention. Development and evaluation of effective strategies and multi-level interventions may increase the uptake of the HPV vaccine among adolescents and young adults.

Education increases COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people in Canadian federal prisons in a prospective randomized controlled trial: The EDUCATE study

Education is key to behavioural adoption and acceptability of health interventions. We evaluated the impact of an educational intervention administered 1:1 to individuals incarcerated in four Canadian federal prisons on COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Eligible individuals (those who had refused all COVID-19 vaccines) were randomized 2:1 to receive the educational intervention or not (control group); those who received the intervention completed questionnaires assessing COVID-19 vaccine-related knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs pre- and post-educational intervention. The primary and secondary outcome measures were COVID-19 vaccine uptake and vaccine confidence, respectively. Between May 3 and September 9, 2022, 202 participants were randomized to receive the intervention, of whom 127 (63 %) agreed to participate. Participants who were randomized to the intervention had higher COVID-19 vaccine uptake vs. the control group (5 % vs 1 %, p = 0.046). COVID-19 vaccine-related knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs improved post-intervention. Education increases COVID-19 vaccine uptake and confidence among people in Canadian federal correctional facilities.

Understanding COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence in People Living with HIV: A pan-Canadian Survey

Understanding the roots of Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy in at-risk groups, such as persons living with HIV (PLWH), is of utmost importance. We developed a modified Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) questionnaire using items from the National Advisory Committee on Immunization Acceptability Matrix. To examine factors associated with receiving COVID-19 vaccine and the link between vaccine attitudes and beliefs with vaccine behavior, PLWH were recruited via social media and community-based organizations (February-May 2022). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize results. Total VHS score was generated by adding Likert scale scores and linear regression models used to compare results between participants who received or did not receive COVID-19 vaccines. Logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with vaccine uptake. A total of 246 PLWH indicated whether they received a COVID-19 vaccine. 89% received ≥ 1 dose. Mean total VHS(SD) for persons having received ≥ 1 COVID-19 vaccine was 17.8(6.2) vs. 35.4(9.4) for participants not having received any COVID-19 vaccine. Persons who received ≥ 1 dose were significantly older than those who had not received any (48.4 ± 13.8 vs. 34.0 ± 7.7 years, p < 0.0001). The majority of participants considered COVID-19 vaccination important for their health(81.3%) and the health of others(84.4%). Multivariate logistic regression revealed the odds of taking ≥ 1dose were increased 2.4-fold [95% CI 1.6, 3.5] with each increase in age of 10 years (p < 0.0001). Sex and ethnicity were not different between groups. In conclusion, PLWH accept COVID-19 vaccines for both altruistic and individual reasons. With evolving recommendations and increasing numbers of booster vaccines, we must re-examine the needs of PLWH regularly.

The intent of students to vaccinate is influenced by cultural factors, peer network, and knowledge about vaccines

Young adults are the future vaccine decision-makers as parents or health-care professionals. To understand their attitudes and behaviors toward vaccination, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of 2079 students attending the University of Antwerp, Belgium and the University of Pisa, Italy. Principal component analysis was used to investigate associations between survey responses and the intent to vaccinate. Vaccination knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors among university students in Italy and Belgium were high. However, only one-half of respondents displayed an intent to vaccinate. High levels of knowledge, positive attitudes, and confidence in vaccines were positively associated with age, higher level of study, being a medical student, a recent vaccination experience, and not knowing trusted persons who did not believe in vaccines. Country of origin was highly correlated with the survey responses and was clustered with lifestyle, family, and data source variables, suggesting a strong modifying effect of culture and family attitudes on how vaccines are perceived in this age-group. Recent meningococcal vaccination campaigns and public discussions around mandatory vaccination in Italy may have influenced these results. We show that the intent to vaccinate was correlated with two main clusters of variables linked to culture (country, family, lifestyle), and to scholarship (knowledge, attitudes, data source) that together influence the behavior of students with respect to vaccination. Our study reinforces previous findings that knowledge about vaccines is key to shaping attitudes and behaviors, but also shows that cultural and lifestyle factors are another platform that could be leveraged in promoting vaccination among young people.

Adult vaccination as part of a healthy lifestyle: moving from medical intervention to health promotion

As the global population ages, there is concern about the effect of an increased proportion of older individuals on the economic sustainability of healthcare systems and the social effects of an older society. Health authorities and advocacy groups in countries at the forefront of this trend are now developing strategies to ameliorate the social and financial effects of an ageing population. There is broad agreement that for both society and for the individuals, it is important to ensure that increasing lifespans are matched with increased "healthspans" - the number of years spent in good health. There is also growing consensus that vaccination is one of the tools that can play an important role in improving adult health - though currently vaccination coverage is often poor. This review focuses on two issues that consistently appear to be associated with under-vaccination: the low awareness of risk (and potential consequences) for vaccine-preventable diseases and a poor understanding of the value of improved vaccination coverage for adults. We suggest that understanding of vaccination as a health-promoting activity, rather than a medical intervention designed to prevent the spread of a specific pathogen - is a crucial step to improve vaccination uptake among adults (see Supplementary video abstract ). Key messages As populations age globally, we are seeing an increasing burden of vaccine-preventable disease in adults. Adult vaccination against some common diseases has been shown to dramatically improve health and quality of life for older people. Despite the attested benefits, vaccination coverage is almost always poor in adults, even in countries where access is free at point of care. In this article, we discuss what appears to a neglected issue in adult vaccination, that of personal autonomy. We argue that adult vaccination will only be successful if it respects individual autonomy and that this requires treating the choice to vaccinate as a public health issue akin to smoking cessation, exercise and healthy diet.

Barriers and enablers to adolescent self-consent for vaccination: A mixed-methods evidence synthesis

•

Synthesis of studies related to self-consent procedures for adolescent vaccination.

•

Robust systematic review methodology used to identify and appraise the literature.

•

There is a need to clarify policy and address professionals’ misunderstandings.

•

Concerns about professional practice and relationships with parents create barriers.

•

Enabling adolescent self-consent entails disputing the primacy of parental consent.

Introduction

The recent global expansion of routine adolescent vaccination programmes has the potential to protect young people against infectious diseases and improve their health. Although the legal framework in many countries permits young people to consent for vaccinations if competent, lack of written parental consent can still prevent uptake. We aimed to review systematically the associated barriers and enablers to implementation of adolescent self-consent procedures.

Methods

A comprehensive search strategy of ten databases from inception to June 2018 was undertaken to identify relevant qualitative and quantitative studies. Titles, abstracts and full texts were assessed for eligibility, and the methodological quality of eligible primary studies evaluated. Thematic synthesis methods were used to interpret and combine qualitative data, and to identify overarching themes as well as similarities and differences within themes. Quantitative data were summarised and, because the data were sufficiently similar in focus, were integrated within the qualitative framework.

Results

Twenty-five publications related to 23 studies were included. Three themes were identified which related to the policy framework, protection, and self-determination. Despite supportive national policy frameworks, implementation of adolescent self-consent procedures can be prevented by local policies, professionals’ misunderstandings of the legal framework and the context in which the vaccination programme is delivered. Motivation to protect young people’s health increased acceptability of adolescent self-consent, but implementation might be prevented to protect the reputation of professionals or relationships with parents. Further, maintaining the role of parents as decision-makers for their child’s healthcare was frequently prioritised over enabling young people’s autonomy to consent.

Conclusions

Barriers to the implementation of adolescent self-consent procedures have implications for young people’s health and uptake of vaccination programmes. There is a need to clarify the policy framework and challenge the primacy of parental consent.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42017084509.

Interventions to help people understand community immunity: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Herd immunity, or community immunity, occurs when susceptible people in a population are indirectly protected from infection thanks to the pervasiveness of immunity within the population. In this study, we aimed to systematically review interventions designed to communicate what community immunity is and how community immunity works to members of the general public.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science for peer-reviewed articles describing interventions with or without evaluations. We then conducted web searches with Google to identify interventions lacking associated publications. We extracted data about the target population of the interventions, the interventions themselves (e.g., did they describe what community immunity is, and how it works), any effects of evaluated interventions, and synthesized data narratively.

RESULTS

We identified 32 interventions: 11 interventions described in peer-reviewed articles and 21 interventions without associated articles. Of the 32 interventions, 5 described what community immunity is, 6 described the mechanisms of how community immunity occurs and 21 described both. Fourteen of the 32 addressed infectious diseases in general while the other 13 addressed one or more specific diseases. Twelve of the 32 interventions used videos, 7 used interactive simulations and 6 used questionnaires. Ten of the 11 peer-reviewed articles described studies evaluating at least one effect of the interventions. Within these 10, 4/4 reported increased knowledge, 3/5 reported shifts of attitudes in favour of vaccination, 2/5 reported increased intentions to vaccinate. Of 3 studies evaluating interventions specifically about community immunity, 2 reported increased intentions to vaccinate.

CONCLUSIONS

A compelling benefit of vaccination exists at the population level in the form of community immunity. Identifying ways to optimally communicate about this benefit may be important, because some evidence suggests that effective communication about community immunity can increase vaccination intentions.