COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among parents in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A meta-analysis

Positive and negative factors of parents vaccinating their children against COVID-19: An umbrella review

Purpose

This umbrella review summarized the factors influencing parents' hesitancy to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 and the evidence to reduce it.

Methods

The analysis included PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus articles published before March 22, 2024. It considered all meta-analyses that investigated parental COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Results

Eight studies were included. Hesitancy rate of parents from five continents to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 was between 0.69 % and 95.0 %. The comprehensive synthesis in this review shows that the influencing factors originate from four aspects: Parents' attitudes, including their trust in the scientific community, concerns about COVID-19 complications, perceptions of children's susceptibility, and support from the social environment, including government incentives, low vaccination costs, and specific sociodemographic characteristics, were positive factors that reduced parental vaccine hesitancy in children. Conversely, negative aspects, including vaccine distrust, the spread of misinformation, poor economic status, and concern about unprecedentedly short development time, were associated with increased hesitancy.

Conclusion

Our study identified positive and negative factors for parental COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in children and highlighted that parental attitude was the most important determinant.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The unprecedented emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the development and global distribution of vaccines, making the understanding of global vaccine acceptance and hesitancy crucial to overcoming barriers to vaccination and achieving widespread immunization.

OBJECTIVE

This umbrella review synthesizes findings from systematic reviews and meta-analyses to provide insights into global perceptions on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy across diverse populations and regions.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search across major databases to identify systematic reviews and meta-analysis that reported COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy. The AMSTAR-2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) criteria were used to assess the methodological quality of included systematic reviews. Meta-analysis was performed using STATA 17 with a random effect model. The data synthesis is presented in a table format and via a narrative.

RESULTS

Our inclusion criteria were met by 78 meta-analyses published between 2021 and 2023. Our analysis revealed a moderate vaccine acceptance rate of 63% (95% CI 0.60%-0.67%) in the general population, with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 97.59%). Higher acceptance rates were observed among health care workers and individuals with chronic diseases, at 64% (95% CI 0.57%-0.71%) and 69% (95% CI 0.61%-0.76%), respectively. However, lower acceptance was noted among pregnant women, at 48% (95% CI 0.42%-0.53%), and parents consenting for their children, at 61.29% (95% CI 0.56%-0.67%). The pooled vaccine hesitancy rate was 32% (95% CI 0.25%-0.39%) in the general population. The quality assessment revealed 19 high-quality, 38 moderate-quality, 15 low-quality, and 6 critically low-quality meta-analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

This review revealed the presence of vaccine hesitancy globally, emphasizing the necessity for population-specific, culturally sensitive interventions and clear, credible information dissemination to foster vaccine acceptance. The observed disparities accentuate the need for continuous research to understand evolving vaccine perceptions and to address the unique concerns and needs of diverse populations, thereby aiding in the formulation of effective and inclusive vaccination strategies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023468363; https://tinyurl.com/2p9kv9cr.

Ivermectin for treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The effect of ivermectin (IVM) in treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still controversial, yet the drug has been widely used in the world. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the clinical outcomes of IVM in patients with COVID-19. From inception to June 22, 2023, the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science (WOS), and scopus databases were searched for relevant observational studies on the risk of RA in migraineurs. We searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and bioRxiv to collect all relevant publications from inception to June 22, 2023. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality rate, mechanical ventilation (MV) requirement, PCR negative conversion, and adverse events (AEs). Revman 5.4 was used to assess the risk of bias (RoB) and quality of evidence. Thirty-three RCTs (n = 10,489) were included. No significant difference in all-cause mortality rates or PCR negative conversion between IVM and controls. There were significant differences in MV requirement (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47-0.96) and AEs (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95) between the two groups. Ivermectin could reduce the risk of MV requirement and AEs in patients with COVID-19, without increasing other risks. In the absence of a better alternative, clinicians could use it with caution.

Relationship between vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behaviors: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

Vaccination is crucial for prevention of infectious diseases, and identification of the impact of vaccine hesitancy on vaccination programs is crucial for early intervention and formulation of policies to alleviate vaccine hesitancy. The aim of this systematic review was to explore the relationship between vaccine hesitancy and negative vaccination behavior globally.

METHODS

We searched for observational studies in various databases. We conducted a meta-analysis using pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI), performed meta regression and subgroup analysis to explore the role factors such as location and individual characteristics on the association between vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behavior.

RESULTS

A total of 46 articles were included in systematic analysis and 34 articles were included in the meta-analysis. The systematic analysis comprised 162,601 samples, whereas the meta-analysis included 147,554 samples. The meta-analysis showed that a higher rate of vaccine hesitancy was associated with an increased likelihood of adverse vaccination behaviors (all adverse behaviors: OR = 1.50, 95 % CI, 1.33-1.70, P < 0.001; unvaccinated: OR = 1.48, 95 % CI, 1.29-1.70, P < 0.001; vaccine delay: OR = 2.61, 95 % CI, 1.97-3.44, P < 0.001). The meta-regression results indicated that the heterogeneity observed was mainly from sample selection methods, age of vaccinees and the health status of participants. The results showed that parents of minor vaccinees or without high-risk health status had a higher association between vaccine hesitancy and vaccine uptake compared with populations exposed to higher health risks or adult vaccinees.

CONCLUSION

The findings provide evidence on the association between vaccine hesitancy and adverse vaccination behaviors. The results showed that these population-specific factors should be considered in future research, and during formulation of interventions and implementation of policies to improve vaccination uptake.

Effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine in preventing morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 in children aged 5 to 11 years: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A rapid systematic review, based on Cochrane rapid review methodology was conducted to assess the effectiveness of two 10μg doses of BNT162b2 vaccine in preventing morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 in children aged 5 to 11 years. We searched the Cochrane Library COVID-19 study register, the COVID-NMA living review database and the McMaster University Living Evidence Synthesis for pre-appraised trials and observational studies up to 7 December 2022. Records were screened independently in duplicate. Where appraisal was not available, these were done in duplicate. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 presenting risk ratios/odds ratios/inverse vaccine efficacy with 95% confidence intervals (CI). GRADE for assessing the overall certainty of the evidence was done in Gradepro. We screened 403 records and assessed 52 full-text articles for eligibility. One randomised controlled trial (RCT) and 24 observational studies were included. The RCT reported that BNT162b2 was likely safe and 91% efficacious, RR 0.09 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.32) against incident COVID-19 infection (moderate certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this is 19 fewer cases per 1,000 vaccines delivered (ranging from 15 to 21 fewer cases). Observational studies reported vaccine effectiveness (VE) against incident COVID-19 infection of 65% (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.47) and 76% against hospitalisation (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.42) (moderate certainty evidence). The absolute effect is 167 fewer cases per 1,000 vaccines given (ranging from 130 fewer to 196 fewer cases) and 4 fewer hospitalisations per 10,000 children (from 3 fewer to 5 fewer hospitalisations). Adverse events following vaccination with BNT162b2 were mild or moderate and transient. The evidence demonstrated a reduction in incident COVID-19 cases and small absolute reduction in hospitalisation if a two-dose BNT162b2 vaccine regimen is offered to children aged 5 to 11 years, compared to placebo. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021286710.

Molnupiravir for intra-household prevention of COVID-19: The MOVe-AHEAD randomized, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of molnupiravir for intra-household post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) of COVID-19.

METHODS

MOVe-AHEAD was a randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial comparing molnupiravir (800 mg twice daily for 5 days) with placebo. Eligible participants were adult, unvaccinated, asymptomatic household contacts of patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. The primary efficacy endpoint was the incidence of COVID-19 through day 14 in modified intention-to-treat (MITT) participants (those who received ≥1 dose of study intervention) without detectable SARS-CoV-2 at baseline, termed the MITT-VN population. Superiority of molnupiravir was prespecified as a stratified one-sided p-value of <0.0249 for the treatment difference in this endpoint.

RESULTS

The MITT population comprised 763 participants randomized to molnupiravir and 764 to placebo; 83.6% had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at baseline. In the MITT-VN population, COVID-19 rates through day 14 were 6.5% with molnupiravir and 8.5% with placebo (one-sided p-value: 0.0848). In the molnupiravir arm, 25/35 of confirmed COVID-19 events (71.4%) occurred after completion of treatment (versus 17/49 [34.7%] for placebo). Adverse event rates were low and similar between molnupiravir and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Molnupiravir was well-tolerated but did not meet the prespecified superiority criterion, possibly influenced in part by the high pre-existing immunity in the trial population.

Predictors of Pediatric COVID-19 vaccination: a case-control study in Tabriz, Iran

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 vaccination of children can help reduce the severity of the infection and the death rate caused by it and also helps achieve herd immunity. The level of acceptance and high vaccination coverage is the main elements in the success of immunization programs. Children's vaccination is dependent on their parent's decision. This study aims to identify predictors of the children's COVID-19 vaccination accomplishment by their parents.

METHOD

In this case-control study, 577 vaccinated children as cases and 366 un-vaccinated children as controls were randomly selected from the general population of Tabriz, Iran 2022, and their data were collected by telephone calls and interviews with the children's parents. Cases and controls were compared in terms of clinical and demographic factors of the child as well as the socioeconomic status (SES) of their parents by using a multivariable mixed-effect logistic regression model.

RESULTS

According to the results of the multivariable logistic regression, the age of the child (OR = 1.26 95% CI (1.14, 1.40), p-value < 0.001), previous COVID-19 infection of the child (OR = 1.92, 95% CI (1.21, 3.04), p-value < 0.001), having no underlying disease in the child (OR = 1.76, 95% CI (1.02, 3.02), p-value = 0.04), the dwelling place of the household (the high-level dwelling in compared to a low level (OR = 3.34, 95% CI (1.6, 6.64), p-value = 0.001), the middle level of dwelling compared with low level (OR = 4.87, 95% CI (2.46, 9.51), p-value < 0.001)), and Father's job (Employee and technician Fathers compared to worker fathers (OR = 2.99, 95% CI (1.55, 5.77), p-value = 0.001)) were significant independent predictors of children COVID-19 vaccination.

CONCLUSION

Several demographic and socioeconomic factors were associated with children's vaccination. Older children, children without any underlying disease, children with a history of COVID-19 infection, and children of parents with higher levels of SES were more likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. This finding can be considered in children's vaccination policymaking.

Factors Influencing the Intention and Uptake of COVID-19 Vaccines on the African Continent: A Scoping Review

The COVID-19 pandemic is a severe concern worldwide, particularly in Africa. Vaccines are crucial in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. This scoping review examined existing literature from 2020 to 2022 on individual, interpersonal, and structural barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination within Africa to facilitate more informed health promotion interventions to improve vaccine uptake. This review was conducted using Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage methodological framework. A comprehensive search was undertaken from 2021 to 2022 using six electronic databases: EBSCOhost, PubMed, Web of Science, ProQuest, WorldCat Discovery, and Google Scholar. Data was collected, charted into themes, and summarized using a standard data extraction sheet in Microsoft Excel. A total of forty (n = 40) published academic articles were reviewed, with many conducted in Nigeria (n = 10), followed by Ethiopia (n = 5) and Ghana (n = 4) and the rest elsewhere in Africa. Thematic narratives were used to report data into six themes: attitudes and perceptions about COVID-19 vaccines, intention to uptake COVID-19 vaccines; factors and barriers associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake; socio-demographic determinants affecting the intention and uptake; and information sources for COVID-19 vaccines. The intention for uptake ranged from 25% to 80.9%, resulting in a suboptimal uptake intention rate (54.2%) on the African continent. Factors that promoted vaccine acceptance included confidence in the COVID-19 vaccines and the desire to protect people. Age, education, and gender were the most common factors significantly associated with vaccine acceptance. Most studies revealed that considerable barriers to vaccine uptake exist in Africa. Concerns about potential side effects, vaccine ineffectiveness, a perceived lack of information, and inaccessibility were among the individual, interpersonal, and structural barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake. The unwillingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was strongly correlated with being female. Mass and social media were the main sources of information regarding COVID-19 vaccines. To encourage vaccine uptake, governments should pay attention to refuting misinformation through integrated community-based approaches, such as creating messages that convey more than just information.