Knowledge, attitudes, and intentions regarding COVID-19 vaccination in the general population and the effect of different framing messages for a brief video on intentions to get vaccinated among unvaccinated individuals in the United States during July 2021

OBJECTIVE

To identify knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs (KABs) associated with COVID-19 vaccination intentions and assess the impact of vaccine-promoting messages on vaccination intentions.

METHODS

Our nationally representative survey measured KABs of COVID-19 vaccination and incorporated a randomized experiment to assess the impact of different framing messages for a video encouraging vaccination intentions among unvaccinated adults in the US. Multivariable multinomial logistic regression models were fitted to investigate the relationships of KABs, trust in public health authorities (PHAs), and vaccine confidence with vaccination intentions. Difference-in-difference estimation was conducted to assess the impact of framing messages for a video on unvaccinated individuals' vaccination intentions.

RESULTS

We observed that people with increasingly favorable vaccine KABs, trust in PHAs, and vaccine confidence were more likely to be vaccinated or intend to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Difference-in-difference estimates indicated a positive impact of exposure to the video on vaccination intentions while framing messages in some cases appeared to lower vaccination intentions. Associations between the video and vaccination intentions were more pronounced among Black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx populations and Democrats; however, associations did not vary by trust in PHAs or vaccine confidence.

CONCLUSION

Videos that encourage people to get vaccinated may provide an efficient approach to nudge vaccine-hesitant individuals towards getting vaccinated. However, framing messages may negatively impact vaccination intentions and need to be developed carefully.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This study provides solid experimental evidence for the importance of tailoring message framing to the characteristics and experience of the audience, while cautioning potential negative impacts of framing that does not match its intended audience. Our findings are applicable to health communication strategies on the population level, such as mass media campaigns, and the use of framing for messages to encourage vaccination but may also be informative for healthcare professionals consulting hesitant individuals about COVID-19 vaccinations.

Changes in vaccine attitudes and recommendations among US Healthcare Personnel during the COVID-19 pandemic

A recommendation from healthcare personnel (HCP) is a strong predictor of vaccination. This study aimed to measure how HCP vaccine attitudes and recommendations changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. HCP were surveyed in January 2023 using a double opt-in network panel. Survey responses were summarized and stratified by HCP type and COVID-19 booster status. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted. Comparisons were made to a September 2021 survey, with differences tested for significance (p < 0.05) using Pearson's χ2 Test. Nearly 82% of the 1207 HCP surveyed had received a COVID-19 booster, most commonly pediatricians (94%), followed by family medicine doctors (87%), pharmacists (74%), and nurses (73%) (p < 0.01). HCP with high trust in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had nearly 6 times the odds (OR: 5.5; 95%CI: 3.9-7.7) of being boosted compared to HCP with low trust. From September 2021 to January 2023, the proportion of HCP recommending vaccines (COVID-19 and routine) to their patients decreased substantially for nearly all vaccines and patient populations specified. Trust in CDC also decreased (from 79 to 73%, p < 0.01), as did support for HCP COVID-19 vaccine mandates (from 65 to 46%, p < 0.01). HCP interest in additional online resources to improve their vaccine discussions with patients increased from 46 to 66% (p < 0.01). Additional regularly updated online resources from trusted medical sources that clarify progressing science and address dynamic public concerns are needed to improve vaccine confidence among HCP and help them support their patients' decision-making.

Benefit-Risk Assessment of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines in Children Aged 6 Months to 4 Years in the Omicron Era

BACKGROUND

There is no risk and benefit assessment of COVID-19 vaccination for children younger than 5 years using a single health outcomes scale. The objective of this study is to compare the expected risk and benefits of the mRNA primary series of COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 6 months to 4 years in the United States using a single health outcome scale in the Omicron era.

METHODS

The expected benefits and risks of the primary two-dose series of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 6 months to 4 years were stratified by sex, the presence of underlying medical conditions, the presence of infection-induced immunity, and the type of mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273). A scoping literature review was conducted to identify the indicators in the decision tree model. The benefit-risk ratio was the outcome of interest.

RESULTS

The benefit-risk ratios ranged from 200.4 in BNT162b2 for males aged 6-11 months with underlying medical conditions and without infection-induced immunity to 3.2 in mRNA-1273 for females aged 1-4 years without underlying medical conditions and with infection-induced immunity.

CONCLUSIONS

The expected benefit of receiving the primary series of mRNA vaccines outweighed the risk among children ages 6 months to 4 years regardless of sex, presence of underlying medical conditions, presence of infection-induced immunity, or type of mRNA vaccines. However, the continuous monitoring of the COVID-19 epidemiology as well as vaccine effectiveness and safety is important.

Lessons learned from COVID-19, H1N1, and routine vaccine pharmacovigilance in the United States: a path to a more robust vaccine safety program

INTRODUCTION

Vaccine pharmacovigilance is an essential component of vaccine safety programs. Vaccine pharmacovigilance refers to detecting uncommon adverse events following immunization (AEFI), determining whether they are due to the vaccine or are only a coincidence, and, for those AEFI considered related to vaccination, characterizing them further. When AEFI are due to vaccination, it is important to characterize the attributable risk and ascertain the biological mechanism causing the adverse reaction to inform efforts to prevent or mitigate the risk. A robust post-authorization safety system is necessary for vaccine decision-making, clinical recommendations, vaccine compensation, and vaccine communication and confidence.

AREAS COVERED

This paper describes the key characteristics of vaccine pharmacovigilance programs, reviews US vaccine pharmacovigilance for routine vaccination programs, COVID-19, and H1N1, and makes recommendations for improving future vaccine safety systems.

EXPERT OPINION

The key characteristics of vaccine pharmacovigilance programs include passive surveillance, active surveillance, clinical investigation and special studies, and causality assessment. Recent examples illustrate the strengths of US pharmacovigilance systems, including systems for passive and active surveillance, as well as areas for improvement, including study of pathogenesis, consistent funding, and leadership. We make recommendations that would, if implemented, further strengthen the vaccine safety system for future routine and pandemic immunizations.

COVID-19 vaccination attitudes, values, intentions: US parents for their children, September 2021

OBJECTIVES

To compare vaccine-related attitudes and values of parents of children 2-17 years old to other adults, examine intentions to vaccinate their children, and identify factors associated with intending to vaccinate children.

METHODS

A nationally representative survey was conducted in September 2021 (just before the EUA for children 5-11 years old) using Ipsos KnowledgePanel, a probability-based web panel. The survey measured COVID-19 vaccination status, intentions, attitudes, values, and trust in public health authorities among US adults. Scale response options to survey items were dichotomized, and cross-tabulations and logistic regressions were performed.

RESULTS

Parents had lower odds of reporting being vaccinated against COVID-19 than other adults even after adjusting for associated sociodemographic characteristics such as age (aOR: 0.66; 95 %CI: 0.50-0.87). The most prevalent parental concerns about COVID-19 vaccines included the speed of their development (88 %), potential side effects (78 %), suspicion of government (77 %), and suspicion of pharmaceutical companies (72 %). Fewer than half (42 %) of parents intended to vaccinate their children 5-11 years old, while 38 % were uncertain and 20 % were unlikely to ever vaccinate their children. Vaccinated parents had higher odds than unvaccinated parents of intending to vaccinate their children (OR: 675.51; 95 %CI: 106.46-4286.12). Discussions with healthcare providers who encouraged COVID-19 vaccination were positively associated with intent to vaccinate children (OR: 11.29; 95 %CI: 2.60-49.02).

CONCLUSIONS

We found parental vaccination and conversations with providers were positively associated with intent to vaccinate children. Decisions about childhood vaccination need to be supported by healthcare providers and a public health system that makes vaccine access and related information equitable and accessible. Vaccination-related decision making should be guided by healthcare providers and provide information about safety and risk to children.

Attitudes toward COVID-19 and Other Vaccines: Comparing Parents to Other Adults, September 2022

Few analyses of COVID-19 vaccine attitudes also cover routine vaccines or focus on parents. In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed US adults in September 2022, immediately following the authorization of updated bivalent COVID-19 boosters for adults but before their authorization for children. The vaccine attitudes of parents were compared to other adults. Fewer parents were up-to-date on COVID-19 vaccines than other adults (54% vs. 67%), even after adjusting for age, education, and race/ethnicity (Adjusted Odds Ratio: 0.58; 95% Confidence Interval: 0.45-0.76). More parents had concerns about COVID-19 vaccines' safety in children (67% vs. 58%; aOR: 1.59; 95%CI: 1.23-2.06) and vaccine ingredients (52% vs. 45%; aOR: 1.41; 95%CI: 1.09-1.81), and more parents perceived COVID-19 in children to be no worse than a cold or the flu (51% vs. 38%; aOR: 1.56; 95%CI: 1.22-2.01). Fewer parents supported COVID-19 vaccine school requirements (52% vs. 57%; aOR: 0.75; 95%CI: 0.58-0.97) and perceived high vaccine coverage among their friends (51% vs. 61%; aOR: 0.60; 95%CI: 0.46-0.78). However, three-quarters of parents intended their child to receive all routinely recommended vaccines, whereas only half of adults intended to receive all routinely recommended vaccines themselves. To improve parental informed vaccine decision-making, public health must ensure pediatric providers have updated resources to support their discussions of vaccine risks and benefits with their patients' parents.

Corrigendum: LetsTalkShots: personalized vaccine risk communication

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1195751.].

Kindergarten Vaccination Status in California After Changes to Medical Exemption Policy

This study evaluates changes in medical exemptions and geographic distribution of kindergarteners in California not up to date on vaccination after changes to state legislation.

Evaluation of online videos to engage viewers and support decision-making for COVID-19 vaccination: how narratives and race/ethnicity enhance viewer experiences

Background

Vaccine hesitancy has hampered the control of COVID-19 and other vaccine-preventable diseases.

Methods

We conducted a national internet-based, quasi-experimental study to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine informational videos. Participants received an informational animated video paired with the randomized assignment of (1) a credible source (differing race/ethnicity) and (2) sequencing of a personal narrative before or after the video addressing their primary vaccine concern. We examined viewing time and asked video evaluation questions to those who viewed the full video.

Results

Among 14,235 participants, 2,422 (17.0%) viewed the full video. Those who viewed a personal story first (concern video second) were 10 times more likely to view the full video (p < 0.01). Respondent-provider race/ethnicity congruence was associated with increased odds of viewing the full video (aOR: 1.89, p < 0.01). Most viewers rated the informational video(s) to be helpful, easy to understand, trustworthy, and likely to impact others' vaccine decisions, with differences by demographics and also vaccine intentions and concerns.

Conclusion

Using peer-delivered, personal narrative, and/or racially congruent credible sources to introduce and deliver vaccine safety information may improve the openness of vaccine message recipients to messages and engagement.

Risk and Benefit of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines for the Omicron Variant by Age, Sex, and Presence of Comorbidity: A Quality-Adjusted Life Years Analysis

The development of the mutant omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic raised the importance of reevaluating the risk and benefit of COVID-19 vaccines. With a decision tree model, we calculated the benefit-risk ratio and the benefit-risk difference of receiving monovalent messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine (primary 2 doses, a third dose, and a fourth dose) in the 4-5 months after vaccination using quality-adjusted life years. The analysis was stratified by age, sex, and the presence of comorbidity. Evidence from peer-reviewed publications and gray literature was reviewed on September 16, 2022, to inform the study. Benefit-risk ratios for receipt of the BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) ranged from 6.8 for males aged 12-17 years without comorbidity for the primary doses to 221.3 for females aged ≥65 years with comorbidity for the third dose. The benefit-risk ratios for receipt of the mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna) ranged from 7.2 for males aged 18-29 years without comorbidity for the primary doses to 101.4 for females aged ≥65 years with comorbidity for the third dose. In all scenarios of the one-way sensitivity analysis, the benefit-risk ratios were more than 1, irrespective of age, sex, comorbidity status, and type of vaccine, for both primary and booster doses. The benefits of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in protecting against the omicron variant outweigh the risks, irrespective of age, sex, and comorbidity.

LetsTalkShots: personalized vaccine risk communication

Introduction

Vaccine hesitancy is a global health threat undermining control of many vaccine-preventable diseases. Patient-level education has largely been ineffective in reducing vaccine concerns and increasing vaccine uptake. We built and evaluated a personalized vaccine risk communication website called LetsTalkShots in English, Spanish and French (Canadian) for vaccines across the lifespan. LetsTalkShots tailors lived experiences, credible sources and informational animations to disseminate the right message from the right messenger to the right person, applying a broad range of behavioral theories.

Methods

We used mixed-methods research to test our animation and some aspects of credible sources and personal narratives. We conducted 67 discussion groups (n = 325 persons), stratified by race/ethnicity (African American, Hispanic, and White people) and population (e.g., parents, pregnant women, adolescents, younger adults, and older adults). Using a large Ipsos survey among English-speaking respondents (n = 2,272), we tested animations aligned with vaccine concerns and specific to population (e.g., parents of children, parents of adolescents, younger adults, older adults).

Results

Discussion groups provided robust feedback specific to each animation as well as areas for improvements across animations. Most respondents indicated that the information presented was interesting (85.5%), clear (96.0%), helpful (87.0%), and trustworthy (82.2%).

Discussion

Tailored vaccine risk communication can assist decision makers as they consider vaccination for themselves, their families, and their communities. LetsTalkShots presents a model for personalized communication in other areas of medicine and public health.

Attitudes and Values of US Adults Not Yet Up-to-Date on COVID-19 Vaccines in September 2022

(1) Background: Periodic resurgences in COVID-19 due to more contagious variants highlight the need to increase coverage of booster doses. (2) Methods: Our September 2022 nationally representative survey of US adults measured COVID-19 vaccination status, intentions, attitudes, values, and confidence in information sources. (3) Findings: Although 85% of the weighted sample reported receiving at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, only 63% reported being up-to-date on COVID-19 vaccines (e.g., received a booster dose). Only 12% of those not yet up-to-date indicated they were likely to get up-to-date as soon as possible, whereas 42% were unlikely to ever get up-to-date, and 46% were still uncertain. Most of those not up-to-date on their COVID-19 vaccines were under 45 years of age (58%), without a bachelor's degree (76%), making under $75,000 annually (53%), and Republican or Independent (82%). Prevalent concerns about COVID-19 vaccines among those uncertain about getting up-to-date included: potential side effects that have not been figured out yet (88%), speed of development (77%), newness (75%), ingredients (69%), drug companies making money (67%), allergic reactions (65%), and experimenting on people (63%). (4) Conclusions: Nearly half of adults not yet up-to-date on COVID-19 vaccines were uncertain about doing so, indicating an opportunity to support their decision-making.

Benefits v. risks of COVID-19 vaccination: an examination of vaccination policy impact on the occurrence of myocarditis and pericarditis

Studies of myocarditis/pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in Hong Kong have been published. Data are consistent with data from other active surveillance or healthcare databases. The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to rarely increase risk of myocarditis, with the highest risk among males aged 12-17 after the second dose. An increased risk of pericarditis has also been shown after the second dose, though less common than myocarditis and more evenly distributed among different sex and age groups. Because of the increased risk of post-vaccine myocarditis, Hong Kong implemented a single dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccine policy on September 15, 2021 for adolescents (age 12-17 years). Post-policy, there were no cases of carditis. 40,167 first dose patients did not receive a second dose. This policy was highly successful in the reduction of carditis, but the trade-off is the potential risk of disease and cost to population-level immunity. This commentary brings forward some important global policy considerations.

Factors Affecting SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Intent and Decision Making Among African American, Native American, and Hispanic Participants in a Qualitative Study

Limited studies are available on how decisions and perceptions on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination have changed since the start of vaccination availability. We performed a qualitative study to identify factors critical to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination decision making and how perspectives evolved among African American/Black, Native American, and Hispanic communities disproportionately affected by COVID-19 and social and economic disadvantage. We conducted 16 virtual meetings, with 232 participants in wave 1 meetings (December 2020) and with 206 returning participants in wave 2 meetings (January and February 2021). Wave 1 vaccine concerns in all communities included information needs, vaccine safety, and speed of vaccine development. Lack of trust in government and the pharmaceutical industry was influential, particularly among African American/Black and Native American participants. Participants showed more willingness to get vaccinated at wave 2 than at wave 1, indicating that many of their information needs had been addressed. Hesitancy remained greater among African American/Black and Native American participants than among Hispanic participants. Participants in all groups indicated that conversations tailored to their community and with those most trustworthy to them would be helpful. To overcome vaccine hesitancy, we propose a model of fully considered SARS-CoV-2 vaccine decision making, whereby public health departments supply information, align with community values and recognize lived experiences, offer support for decision making, and make vaccination easy and convenient.

Vaccinomics: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

This scoping review summarizes a key aspect of vaccinomics by collating known associations between heterogeneity in human genetics and vaccine immunogenicity and safety.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for articles in English using terms covering vaccines routinely recommended to the general US population, their effects, and genetics/genomics. Included studies were controlled and demonstrated statistically significant associations with vaccine immunogenicity or safety. Studies of Pandemrix®, an influenza vaccine previously used in Europe, were also included, due to its widely publicized genetically mediated association with narcolepsy.

FINDINGS

Of the 2,300 articles manually screened, 214 were included for data extraction. Six included articles examined genetic influences on vaccine safety; the rest examined vaccine immunogenicity. Hepatitis B vaccine immunogenicity was reported in 92 articles and associated with 277 genetic determinants across 117 genes. Thirty-three articles identified 291 genetic determinants across 118 genes associated with measles vaccine immunogenicity, 22 articles identified 311 genetic determinants across 110 genes associated with rubella vaccine immunogenicity, and 25 articles identified 48 genetic determinants across 34 genes associated with influenza vaccine immunogenicity. Other vaccines had fewer than 10 studies each identifying genetic determinants of their immunogenicity. Genetic associations were reported with 4 adverse events following influenza vaccination (narcolepsy, GBS, GCA/PMR, high temperature) and 2 adverse events following measles vaccination (fever, febrile seizure).

CONCLUSION

This scoping review identified numerous genetic associations with vaccine immunogenicity and several genetic associations with vaccine safety. Most associations were only reported in one study. This illustrates both the potential of and need for investment in vaccinomics. Current research in this field is focused on systems and genetic-based studies designed to identify risk signatures for serious vaccine reactions or diminished vaccine immunogenicity. Such research could bolster our ability to develop safer and more effective vaccines.

COVID-19 vaccination among different types of US Healthcare Personnel

BACKGROUND

Increasing vaccine coverage remains the best way to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare personnel (HCP) have long been the most credible and frequently used source of vaccine information for the public, and an HCP recommendation is a strong predictor of vaccination.

METHODS

A survey of HCP was conducted in September 2021 via a double opt-in network panel. Responses to survey items were summarized and stratified by HCP type and adjusted logistic regression models were fitted.

RESULTS

>94% of the 1074 HCP surveyed reported receiving at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine or intending to soon, with vaccinating most common among pediatricians (98%), followed by family medicine doctors (96%), pharmacists (94%), and nurses/nurse practitioners/physician assistants (88%). HCP with high trust in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had 26 times the odds of vaccinating of HCP with low trust (95%CI: 9, 74). Nearly half of unvaccinated HCP (47%) were concerned about side effects, and one third of unvaccinated HCP (33%) were concerned the vaccine was developed too quickly. About three quarters of HCP reported strongly recommending the Pfizer-BioNTech (75%) and Moderna (70%) vaccines to their patients, compared to about one quarter (24%) strongly recommending Johnson & Johnson.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most HCP are vaccinated against COVID-19 and strongly recommend vaccination to their patients, some harbor similar concerns to the public. Additional resources - regularly updated to explain the progressing scientific landscape and address ever evolving public concerns - are needed to further improve vaccine coverage among HCP and aid them in supporting the decision-making of their patients.

Characterization of parental intention to vaccinate elementary school aged children in the state of California

In October 2021, Emergency Use Authorization of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines was granted for children aged 5-11. To ensure vaccine uptake in children upon approval, California will implement a state-wide executive order mandating COVID-19 vaccination for school children following full US FDA approval. This study uses survey data collected between November 6th, 2020 and December 14th, 2020 (n = 2091) to identify how sociodemographic characteristics and attitudes towards childhood vaccines among California parents were associated with their intentions to vaccinate their child against COVID-19. About one quarter (26 %) of surveyed California parents did not intend to vaccinate their child, suggesting skepticism towards the COVID-19 vaccine for children and the potential for pushback to a COVID-19 vaccine school-entry mandate. However, 17 % were unsure of their decision, suggesting the potential for public health messaging to make a positive impact on COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake. This study identifies characteristics of hesitant parents in California to prioritize for research and outreach. These data also provide a baseline for parental attitudes towards vaccinating children against COVID-19 in California, which will be useful for characterizing changes in attitudes towards childhood COVID-19 vaccination over time.

Economic impact of vaccine safety incident in Ukraine: The economic case for safety system investment

BACKGROUND

Vaccine confidence and coverage decreased following a death temporally but not causally related to measles vaccination in Ukraine in 2008. Large measles outbreaks including international exportations followed. Herein we characterize this experience including associated costs.

METHODS

Mixed-methods were used to characterize this vaccine safety incident and quantify health and economic costs. Qualitative interviews illuminate the incident, social climate, and corruption that influenced vaccine confidence in Ukraine. A literature review explored attitudes toward vaccines in the USSR and post-independence Ukraine. Infectious disease incidence was examined before and after the vaccine safety incident. An economic analysis estimated associated healthcare costs, including prevention and outbreak control measures, additional vaccination activities due to failure of the 2008 campaign, treatment costs for new cases domestically and foreign exportation, and productivity loss from treatment time and mortality for new cases.

FINDINGS

Vaccine hesitancy and distrust in government and public health programs due to corruption existed in Ukraine before the vaccine safety incident. The mishandling of the 2008 incident catalyzed the decline of vaccine confidence and prompted poor procurement decisions, leading to a drop in infant vaccination coverage, increased domestic measles cases, and exportation of measles. The estimated cost of this incident was approximately $140 million from 2008 to 2018.

INTERPRETATION

Absent a rapid and credible vaccine safety response, a coincidental death following immunization resulted in major outbreaks of measles with substantial economic costs. Adequate investments in a post-licensure safety system may help avoid similar future incidents.

MomsTalkShots, tailored educational app, improves vaccine attitudes: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Many pregnant women and parents have concerns about vaccines. This analysis examined the impact of MomsTalkShots, an individually tailored educational application, on vaccine attitudes of pregnant women and mothers.

METHODS

MomsTalkShots was the patient-level component of a multi-level intervention to improve maternal and infant vaccine uptake that also included provider- and practice-level interventions. The impact of these interventions was studied using a two-by-two factorial design, randomizing at both the patient- and the practice-level. Study staff recruited pregnant women from a diverse set of prenatal care practices in Colorado and Georgia between June 2017 and July 2018. All participants (n = 2087) received a baseline survey of maternal and infant vaccine intentions and attitudes, and two follow-up surveys at least 1 month and 1 year after their infant's birth, respectively. Half of participants (n = 1041) were randomly assigned to receive educational videos through MomsTalkShots, algorithmically tailored to their vaccine intentions, attitudes, and demographics. Since the practice/provider intervention did not appear impactful, this analysis focused on MomsTalkShots regardless of the practice/provider intervention.

RESULTS

By 1 month post-birth, MomsTalkShots increased perceived risk of maternal influenza disease (61% among MomsTalkShots recipients vs 55% among controls; Odds Ratio: 1.61, 95% Confidence Interval: 1.23-2.09), confidence in influenza vaccine efficacy (73% vs 63%; OR: 1.97, 95%CI: 1.47-2.65), and perceived vaccine knowledge (55% vs 48%; OR: 1.39, 95%CI: 1.13-1.72). Among those intending not to vaccinate at baseline, MomsTalkShots increased perceived risk of maternal influenza disease (38% vs 32%; OR: 2.07, 95%CI: 1.15-3.71) and confidence in influenza vaccine efficacy (44% vs 28%; OR: 2.62, 95%CI: 1.46-4.69). By 1 year post-birth, MomsTalkShots increased perceived vaccine knowledge (62% vs 50%; OR: 1.74, 95%CI: 1.36-2.24) and trust in vaccine information from obstetricians and pediatricians (64% vs 55%; OR: 1.53, 95%CI: 1.17-2.00). Among those uncertain about vaccinating at baseline, MomsTalkShots increased perceived vaccine knowledge (47% vs 12%; OR: 6.89, 95%CI: 1.52-31.25) and reduced infant vaccine safety concerns (71% vs 91%; OR: 0.24, 95%CI: 0.06-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

MomsTalkShots improved pregnant women's and mothers' knowledge and perceptions of maternal and infant vaccines and the diseases they prevent, and offers a scalable tool to address vaccine hesitancy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov on 13/09/2016 (registration number: NCT02898688).

Impact of vaccine pause due to Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) following vaccination with the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine manufactured by Janssen/Johnson & Johnson on vaccine hesitancy and acceptance among the unvaccinated population

BACKGROUND

In response to reports of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) post-vaccination, the Johnson & Johnson (J&J) vaccine was paused and then restarted in April 2021. Our objective was to assess whether this pause adversely impacted vaccine confidence.

METHODS

Two large internet-based surveys were conducted in the US among adults to measure knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of the J&J vaccine pause and rates of vaccine hesitancy among unvaccinated persons before, during and after the pause.

RESULTS

Among 66% of respondents aware of the pause, 44% identified blood clots as the reason for the pause without prompting. The impact of the pause on vaccine behavior among unvaccinated persons and perception of the vaccine safety system was mixed and modified by trust in the public health authorities. Those who were less willing to get vaccinated because of the pause were less inclined for all vaccines, not only the J&J product. Moreover, a notable proportion (22.1%) of the small number of persons (n = 30) vaccinated with the J&J vaccine after the pause reported not receiving information about the risk of TTS. The proportion of unvaccinated persons who were hesitant was increasing before and during the pause and then leveled off after the pause.

CONCLUSIONS

The J&J vaccine pause is unlikely to be a major barrier to vaccine uptake. Public attitudes about vaccines may be more resilient than appreciated, especially when safety issues are investigated with transparent communication. This paper has important implications for messaging and program administration with future vaccine-specific adverse events. Efforts may be warranted to ensure all persons being offered the J&J vaccine are made aware of the risk of TTS.

Multi-tiered intervention to increase maternal immunization coverage: A randomized, controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a multi-component intervention package of maternal immunization uptake in obstetric care clinics.

METHODS

In a multi-level, cluster- and individually-randomized controlled trial we implemented an evidence-based intervention that targeted practice-, provider- and patient-level barriers to vaccine uptake. Obstetric practices were randomized to receive the practice and provider-level interventions or continue their normal standard of care. We enrolled pregnant women at practices in Georgia and Colorado and randomized women into patient-level intervention and control groups, resulting in four study arms. The primary outcomes were receipt of the influenza and tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccines during pregnancy. A sample size of 550 women per arm (2200 total) was planned and enrolled to compare the intervention between the four study arms.

RESULTS

Between June 2017 and July 2018, 4907 women were screened and 2200 women were randomized, 550 to each of the four study arms. We were unable to follow-up with 108 women, for a final sample size of 2092. Sample characteristics and sample size were similar among study arms. There was no significant increase in Tdap or influenza vaccine uptake overall. Among women who had no intention of or were unsure about receiving the influenza vaccine during pregnancy, those who received just the patient-level intervention were 61% more likely to receive the influenza vaccine than those in the control arm (Relative risk: 1.61; 95% Confidence Interval: 1.18-2.21). There was no significant difference in vaccine uptake for either influenza or tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis between the four arms of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial highlights the need for more targeted interventions to improve vaccine uptake. Future work should focus on clinics with low baseline vaccine uptake and the patient-level intervention should be expanded and targeted towards women with low vaccine confidence.

Use of Random Domain Intercept Technology to Track COVID-19 Vaccination Rates in Real-Time Across the United States: Survey Study

Background

Accurate and timely COVID-19 vaccination coverage data are vital for informing targeted, effective messaging and outreach and identifying barriers to equitable health service access. However, gathering vaccination rate data is challenging, and efforts often result in information that is either limited in scope (eg, limited to administrative data) or delayed (impeding the ability to rapidly respond). The evaluation of innovative technologies and approaches that can assist in addressing these limitations globally are needed.

Objective

The objective of this survey study was to assess the validity of Random Domain Intercept Technology (RDIT; RIWI Corp) for tracking self-reported vaccination rates in real time at the US national and state levels. RDIT—a form of online intercept sampling—has the potential to address the limitations of current vaccination tracking systems by allowing for the measurement of additional data (eg, attitudinal data) and real-time, rapid data collection anywhere there is web access.

Methods

We used RDIT from June 30 to July 26, 2021, to reach a broad sample of US adult (aged ≥18 years) web users and asked questions related to COVID-19 vaccination. Self-reported vaccination status was used as the focus of this validation exercise. National- and state-level RDIT-based vaccination rates were compared to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)–reported national and state vaccination rates. Johns Hopkins University’s and Emory University’s institutional review boards designated this project as public health practice to inform message development (not human subjects research).

Results

By using RDIT, 63,853 adult web users reported their vaccination status (6.2% of the entire 1,026,850 American web-using population that was exposed to the survey). At the national level, the RDIT-based estimate of adult COVID-19 vaccine coverage was slightly higher (44,524/63,853, 69.7%; 95% CI 69.4%-70.1%) than the CDC-reported estimate (67.9%) on July 15, 2021 (ie, midway through data collection; t_63,852=10.06; P<.001). The RDIT-based and CDC-reported state-level estimates were strongly and positively correlated (r=0.90; P<.001). RDIT-based estimates were within 5 percentage points of the CDC’s estimates for 29 states.

Conclusions

This broad-reaching, real-time data stream may provide unique advantages for tracking the use of a range of vaccines and for the timely evaluation of vaccination interventions. Moreover, RDIT could be harnessed to rapidly assess demographic, attitudinal, and behavioral constructs that are not available in administrative data, which could allow for deeper insights into the real-time predictors of vaccine uptake–enabling targeted and timely interventions.

Masks, money, and mandates: A national survey on efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccination intentions in the United States

Various efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates have been employed in the United States. We sought to rapidly investigate public reactions to these efforts to increase vaccination, including self-reported responses to widespread reduced masking behavior, monetary incentive programs to get vaccinated, and work vaccination requirements. Using a unique method for data collection (Random Domain Intercept Technology), we captured a large (N = 14,152), broad-based sample of the United States Web-using population (data collected from June 30 -July 26, 2021). About 3/4 of respondents reported being vaccinated. The likelihood of vaccination and vaccination intention differed across various demographic indicators (e.g., gender, age, income, political leaning). We observed mixed reactions to efforts aimed at increasing vaccination rates among unvaccinated respondents. While some reported that specific efforts would increase their likelihood of getting vaccinated (between 16% and 32%), others reported that efforts would decrease their likelihood of getting vaccinated (between 17% and 42%). Reactions differed by general vaccination intention, as well as other demographic indicators (e.g., race, education). Our results highlight the need to fully understand reactions to policy changes, programs, and mandates before they are communicated to the public and employed. Moreover, the results emphasize the importance of understanding how reactions differ across groups, as this information can assist in targeting intervention efforts and minimizing potentially differential negative impact.

Evaluation of Trends in Homeschooling Rates After Elimination of Nonmedical Exemptions to Childhood Immunizations in California, 2012-2020

INTRODUCTION

In 2015, California passed Senate Bill No. 277 (SB 277) and became the first state in more than 30 years to eliminate nonmedical exemptions to mandatory childhood immunizations for school entry. One concern that emerged was that the law created an incentive for parents to remove children from brick-and-mortar schools to bypass the immunization requirements.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the trends in homeschooling rates after the elimination of nonmedical exemptions to the requirement of childhood immunizations for school entry.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This preintervention-postintervention cross-sectional study calculated homeschooling rates as the number of students in kindergarten through grade 8 (K-8) enrolled through each of California's 3 homeschooling mechanisms (independent study program, private school affidavit, and private school satellite program) divided by all K-8 students enrolled in the same academic year. Data on homeschooling rates were obtained from the California Department of Education. Interrupted time series analyses were conducted using a linear regression model in which the outcome variable was the percentage of students enrolled in a homeschool program before and after SB 277. Data were collected and analyzed from October 3, 2012, to October 2, 2019.

INTERVENTION

Passage of SB 277, which eliminated nonmedical exemptions to childhood immunizations for school entry.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Homeschooling rates for K-8 students.

RESULTS

Among the students included in the analysis, the homeschooling enrollment for K-8 students in California increased from 35 122 students (0.8%) during the 2012-2013 school year to 86 574 students (1.9%) during the 2019-2020 school year; however, the implementation of SB 277 was not associated with an increase in the percentage of students enrolled in homeschooling programs in California beyond the secular trend. The increase in homeschooling was greatest for the lower grade levels: kindergarten homeschooling enrollment increased from 2068 students (0.4%) in the 2012-2013 school year to 10 553 students (1.9%) in the 2019-2020 school year, whereas the grade 8 homeschool enrollment rate increased from 5146 students (1.0%) in the 2012-2013 school year to 10 485 students (2.0%) in the 2019-2020 school year. Independent study programs accounted for 20 149 students (45.3%) of homeschooling enrollment, private school affidavits accounted for 19 333 students (43.5%), and private school satellite programs accounted for 4935 students (11.1%) during the 2015-2016 school year.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this study suggest that legislative action to limit nonmedical exemptions for compulsory vaccination for school entry is not associated with removal of students from classroom-based instruction in brick-and-mortar institutions.

Promoting COVID-19 vaccine acceptance: recommendations from the Lancet Commission on Vaccine Refusal, Acceptance, and Demand in the USA

Since the first case of COVID-19 was identified in the USA in January, 2020, over 46 million people in the country have tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Several COVID-19 vaccines have received emergency use authorisations from the US Food and Drug Administration, with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine receiving full approval on Aug 23, 2021. When paired with masking, physical distancing, and ventilation, COVID-19 vaccines are the best intervention to sustainably control the pandemic. However, surveys have consistently found that a sizeable minority of US residents do not plan to get a COVID-19 vaccine. The most severe consequence of an inadequate uptake of COVID-19 vaccines has been sustained community transmission (including of the delta [B.1.617.2] variant, a surge of which began in July, 2021). Exacerbating the direct impact of the virus, a low uptake of COVID-19 vaccines will prolong the social and economic repercussions of the pandemic on families and communities, especially low-income and minority ethnic groups, into 2022, or even longer. The scale and challenges of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign are unprecedented. Therefore, through a series of recommendations, we present a coordinated, evidence-based education, communication, and behavioural intervention strategy that is likely to improve the success of COVID-19 vaccine programmes across the USA.

Walking the Tightrope: Reevaluating science communication in the era of COVID-19 vaccines

Scientists are trained to be skeptical and not overstate the existing evidence. This cautiousness is a valuable asset when working in scientific research, where the goal is the pursuit of knowledge and truth. It becomes a handicap when scientists are asked to communicate to the public about pressing topics such as COVID-19 vaccines. Often in such contexts, immediate recommendations are sought, and decisions must be made even when complete evidence is lacking. For scientists to be effective public communicators, they must adjust their mindset and embrace brevity, clarity, and other principles of effective communication. Focusing messages on what is known fosters public confidence in taking needed actions, whereas focusing on what is still unknown fosters inaction and seeds doubt. The implementation of principles of effective communication does not inherently conflict with maintaining scientific accuracy and acknowledging uncertainty, but it does require additional care, effort, and training.

Vaccinomics: a cross-sectional survey of public values

Objective: We characterize public values regarding vaccinomics, which aims to improve vaccine safety and effectiveness using genomics.Methods: Panel survey (2020) of ≥18-year-olds with embedded animation introduced vaccinomics. Sociodemographic, health, and vaccination-related items were adapted from validated scales. Novel items measured trust in public health authorities, vaccinomics-related values, and preferences for federal funding: vaccinomics compared with vaccine issues and chronic diseases. Beginning and end of survey confidence in vaccine safety was measured to assess potential changes. Data were weighted to the U.S. Census. Vaccinomics-related concerns were stratified by sociodemographic characteristics, vaccine hesitancy status (composite outcome), reported serious vaccine reactions, and trust in public health authorities (PHA). Log binomial regression models estimated associations between these variables and agency to make vaccine-related decisions.Results: Most (70.7%, N = 1,925) respondents expected vaccinomics would increase their vaccine confidence compared to now. Agreement was highest among those without serious vaccine reaction experience (unexperienced: 74.2% versus experienced: 62.3%), with high trust in PHA (high: 83.3% versus low: 57.4%), and low vaccine hesitancy among parents of teenagers (low: 78.8% versus high: 62.5%) and adults without minor children (low: 79.8% versus high: 60.6%; all p < .01). Belief that vaccination was an individual's choice was associated with reported serious reactions (adjusted Prevalence Ratio (aPR): 1.16; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.25) and low trust (aPR: 0.91; 0.84, 0.98). Beginning versus end of survey vaccine safety perceptions were similar.Conclusion: Federal funding, communications, and policies should assure the public that vaccinomics will not remove their decision-making power and engender trust in PHA.

Healthcare Personnel (HCP) Attitudes About Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination After Emergency Use Authorization

BACKGROUND

We previously reported on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination intent among healthcare personnel (HCP) before emergency use authorization. We found widespread hesitancy and a substantial proportion of HCP did not intend to vaccinate.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of HCP, including clinical and nonclinical staff, researchers, and trainees between 21 February and 19 March 2021. The survey evaluated vaccine attitudes, beliefs, intent, and acceptance.

RESULTS

Overall, 3981 (87.7%) of respondents had already received a COVID-19 vaccine or planned to get vaccinated. There were significant differences in vaccine acceptance by gender, age, race, and hospital role. Males (93.7%) were more likely than females (89.8%) to report vaccine acceptance (P < .001). Mean age was higher among those reporting vaccine acceptance (P < .001). Physicians and scientists showed the highest acceptance rate (97.3%), whereas staff in ancillary services showed the lowest acceptance rate (79.9%). Unvaccinated respondents were more likely to be females, to have refused vaccines in the past due to reasons other than illness or allergy, to care for COVID-19 patients, or to rely on themselves when making vaccination decision. Vaccine acceptance was more than twice previous intent among Black respondents, an increase from 30.8% to 73.8%, and across all hospital roles with all > 80% vaccine acceptance.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of HCP were vaccinated, much higher than reporting intent before vaccine was available. However, many HCP-particularly ancillary services-are still hesitant. Feasible and effective interventions to address the hesitant, including individually-tailored education strategies are needed, or vaccine can be mandated.

Using the health belief model to identify barriers to seasonal influenza vaccination among Australian adults in 2019

BACKGROUND

Each year tens of thousands of Australians become ill with influenza, resulting in thousands of severe infections that require hospitalisation. However, only 40% of adults receive the annual influenza vaccine. We surveyed Australian adults to provide up to date, population-specific data on the predictors and barriers of seasonal influenza vaccination.

METHODS

We administered an online survey to a nationally representative sample of Australian adults. We designed survey questions using the theoretical constructs of the health belief model. Using simple and multivariable Poisson regression, we identified attitudes and beliefs associated with influenza vaccination in 2019.

RESULTS

Among 1,444 respondents, 51.7% self-reported influenza vaccination in 2019. We estimated vaccine coverage to be 44% for adults under 45, 46% for adults aged 45 to 64 and 77% for adults aged 65 and over. The strongest individual predictors of self-reported vaccination were believing the vaccine is effective at preventing influenza (APR = 3.71; 95% CI = 2.87-4.80), followed by recalling their doctor recommending the vaccine (APR = 2.70; 95% CI = 2.31-3.16). Common perceived barriers that predicted self-reported vaccination included believing the vaccine could give you influenza (APR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.52-0.67), believing the vaccine can make you ill afterwards (APR = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.62-0.74) and preferring to develop immunity "naturally" (APR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.32-0.45).

CONCLUSION

Although vaccine uptake in 2019 appears to be higher than previous years, there are perceived barriers which may limit uptake among Australians. Tailored interventions are needed to combat widespread influenza vaccine hesitancy, particularly among high-risk groups.

School-level perceptions and enforcement of the elimination of nonmedical exemptions to vaccination in California

In 2015, California passed Senate Bill 277 eliminating all nonmedical exemptions to school vaccinations. We aimed to explore school-level modes of SB277 enforcement, characterize vaccination knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of school officials, and identify whether school vaccination policies are associated with medical exemptions being granted. Surveys were mailed to a stratified random sample of 1,450 schools in California. School personnel (n = 752) reported their medical training, vaccination beliefs, enforcement of vaccination policies, and school rates of medical exemptions. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess whether school policies are associated with the likelihood of medical exemption requests being granted. Nurses were more likely than non-nurses to hold beliefs recognizing the importance of vaccination. A school where the survey respondent was a nurse was more likely to have granted a medical exemption request compared to a school where the respondent was not a nurse (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.34-3.36). The training of school officials and school-level practices may impact the enforcement of medical exemptions. Equipping school officials as competent sources of vaccine information for concerned parents will be valuable in improving parental vaccine uptake.

Novel vaccine safety issues and areas that would benefit from further research

Vaccine licensure requires a very high safety standard and vaccines routinely used are very safe. Vaccine safety monitoring prelicensure and postlicensure enables continual assessment to ensure the benefits outweigh the risks and, when safety problems arise, they are quickly identified, characterised and further problems prevented when possible. We review five vaccine safety case studies: (1) dengue vaccine and enhanced dengue disease, (2) pandemic influenza vaccine and narcolepsy, (3) rotavirus vaccine and intussusception, (4) human papillomavirus vaccine and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome, and (5) RTS, S/adjuvant system 01 malaria vaccine and meningitis, cerebral malaria, female mortality and rebound severe malaria. These case studies were selected because they are recent and varied in the vaccine safety challenges they elucidate. Bringing these case studies together, we develop lessons learned that can be useful for addressing some of the potential safety issues that will inevitably arise with new vaccines.

Communicating With Vaccine-Hesitant Parents: A Narrative Review

Although vaccines are considered one of the most effective medical interventions to prevent vaccine preventable disease and associated morbidity and mortality, a number of recent outbreaks are threatening the gains made by vaccines. Vaccine hesitancy is a key driver of vaccine refusal and has been associated with vaccine preventable outbreaks. While parents seek information from many sources to inform their vaccine decision-making process, they continue to view their child's pediatric provider as a trusted source of vaccine information. The communication that occurs between a provider and parent with regards to vaccination is critical in reducing concerns and nudging parents toward vaccine acceptance. However, vaccine-hesitant parents raise issues in this encounter that many providers feel ill-equipped to answer, due to lack of training on evidence-based communication strategies. We focus on promising approaches related to patient-provider communication within the context of vaccination. We found empirical evidence that the use of a presumptive format to recommend vaccines, motivational interviewing, and tailoring information to increase message salience are approaches that can positively affect vaccine acceptance. As providers continue to serve as important influencers in the vaccine decision-making process, it is evident that there is a need to continue to identify evidence-based, and practically implementable approaches to mitigate parental vaccine hesitancy. Providers play a key role in improving coverage rates, and therefore it is paramount to seek ways to improve how providers communicate about vaccines.

Pharmacy, workplace or primary care? Where Australian adults get their influenza vaccines

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the proportion of influenza vaccines administered in non-medical settings in Australia in 2019 and identify factors associated with vaccination site.

METHODS

We surveyed 1,444 Australian adults online in October 2019. To identify factors associated with vaccination site, we used Pearson's chi-square test. We used thematic analysis to describe responses to the question, 'Please explain why you chose to get vaccinated there'.

RESULTS

Most participants (73%) received the influenza vaccine in a medical setting, while 13% received it at a pharmacy and 14% at their workplace. Being vaccinated in pharmacy was associated with being under 65 years of age (p<0.01), marital status (p=0.01), and not having a high-risk comorbidity (p<0.01). Workplace vaccination was associated with being under 65 (p<0.01), household income (p<0.01), not having a regular general physician/practice (p=0.01), having private insurance (p<0.01), and not having a high-risk comorbidity (p<0.01). There was no association between site of vaccination and first-time vaccination (p=0.71, p=0.22).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite new policies allowing pharmacists to administer influenza vaccines, most Australian adults are still vaccinated in medical settings. Pharmacy and workplace vaccination settings were more common among younger adults without high-risk comorbidities. Implications for public health: Workplaces, pharmacies and other non-medical settings may provide an opportunity to increase influenza vaccination among healthy, working-age adults who might otherwise forego annual vaccination. Pharmacies may also provide a convenient location for the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine, particularly in medically underserved areas.

Development of a Scale to Measure Trust in Public Health Authorities: Prevalence of Trust and Association with Vaccination

Infectious disease outbreaks highlight the importance of trust in public health authorities to avoid fear and improve adherence to recommendations. There is currently no established and validated measure for trust in public health authorities. We aimed to develop and validate an instrument that measures trust in public health authorities and to assess the association between trust in public health authorities and vaccine attitudes. We developed 20 items to measure trust in public health authorities. After implementing a survey in January 2020, we investigated relationships between the items, reduced the number of items, and identified latent constructs of the scale. We assessed variability in trust and how trust was associated with vaccine attitudes, beliefs, and self-reported vaccine acceptance. The pool was reduced to a 14-item trust in public health authorities scale and we found that this trust model was strongly associated with acceptance of vaccines. Our scale can be used to examine the relationship between trust in public health authorities and adherence to public health recommendations. The measure needs to be validated in other settings to determine whether they are associated with other areas where the public question public health authority recommendations.

COVID-19 vaccination attitudes, values and intentions among United States adults prior to emergency use authorization

Introduction

Safe and effective vaccines against Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) provide the best opportunity to control the pandemic. Having safe and efficacious vaccines available is only half the equation; people must also take them. We describe a study to identify COVID-19 vaccine attitudes, values and intentions immediately preceding authorization of COVID-19 vaccines in the US.

Methods

A national panel survey was conducted to measure intent to receive COVID-19 vaccines as well as disease and vaccine attitudes, values and trust in local, state and federal public health authorities.

Results

Greater than 80% of respondents reported confidence they could adhere to COVID recommendations such as mask wearing, social distancing and hand washing. The majority of respondents (70%) reported believing that current drugs were somewhat or very good at treating COVID-19 infection.

Vaccine intent fell into three groups: Intenders (50%), Wait and Learn (40%), and Unlikelys (10%). Intent to get vaccinated was substantially lower among African American (32%), and higher among men (56%), those over 60 years of age (61%), those with a Bachelor’s degree or higher (63%), and Democrats (63%). The Wait and Learn group, compared to the Intenders, were less likely to report being diagnosed with a high risk condition for COVID-19, receiving an influenza vaccine in the past 12 months, discussing COVID-19 vaccine with their healthcare provider, perceiving COVID-19 as severe, considering a COVID-19 vaccine important to stop the spread of infection, and wering a mask usually or almost always.

Conclusion

Only half of US adults intend to accept COVID-19 vaccines; most others (40%) are uncertain. Levels of immunity associated with community protection will not be achieved without reaching those who are currently uncertain. Characterizing COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and intentions and ascertaining values and trust in local, state, and federal public health authorities that impact vaccine decision-making are essential.

Ethical and policy implications of vaccinomics in the United States: community members' perspectives

Objectives: We aimed to elucidate public values regarding the use of genomics to improve vaccine development and use (vaccinomics).

Methods: Adults ≥18 years-old were recruited through social media and community organizations, and randomly assigned to one of four nested discussion groups in Boulder, CO and Baltimore, MD. Participants rated their confidence in vaccine safety and effectiveness prior to and after discussing vaccinomics. Before departing, they prioritized funding for vaccinomics versus federal priorities (vaccine safety and efficacy, new vaccines, and free vaccines) and chronic diseases (cancer, heart disease, and diabetes). Grounded Theory-influenced methods were used to identify themes.

Results: Participants broadly supported vaccinomics. Emergent themes: concerns about reduced privacy/confidentiality, increased genetically based stigma/discrimination, and reduced agency to make vaccine-related decisions through genetically based prioritization. Participants supported vaccinomics’ potential for increased personalization. Some participants favored prioritizing others over themselves during a vaccine shortage, while others did not. Some participants worried health insurance companies would discriminate against them based on information discovered through vaccinomics. Participants feared inequitable implementation of vaccinomics would contribute to discrimination and marginalization of vulnerable populations. Discussing vaccinomics did not impact perceptions of vaccine safety and effectiveness. Federal funding for vaccinomics was broadly supported.

Conclusion: Participants supported vaccinomics’ potential for increased personalization, noting policy safeguards to facilitate equitable implementation and protect privacy were needed. Despite some concerns, participants hoped vaccinomics would improve vaccine safety and effectiveness. Policies regarding vaccinomics’ implementation must address public concerns about the privacy and confidentiality of genetic information and potential inequities in access to vaccinomics’ benefits.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Maternal Vaccine Knowledge, Attitudes, and Intentions

OBJECTIVES

Although disparities in maternal vaccine acceptance among racial/ethnic groups are well documented, the reasons for these disparities are unclear. The objective of this study was to describe differences in pregnant women's knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, intentions, and trust regarding maternal and infant vaccines by race/ethnicity.

METHODS

We collected survey data from 1862 pregnant women from diverse prenatal care practices in Georgia and Colorado from June 2017 through July 2018. We performed multiple logistic regressions to determine differences in intentions, knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and trust by race/ethnicity and calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Compared with White women, Black and Hispanic women were less confident in vaccine safety and efficacy and less likely to perceive risk of acquiring vaccine-preventable diseases, report provaccine social norms, indicate having enough vaccine knowledge, and trust vaccine information from health care providers and public health authorities. Black women were the least confident in the safety of the maternal influenza vaccine (OR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.27-0.49); maternal tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccine (OR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.27-0.52); and infant vaccines overall (OR = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.28-0.58), and were least likely to intend to receive both maternal vaccines (OR = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.27-0.47) or all infant vaccines on time (OR = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34-0.61) as compared with White women.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding differences in behavioral constructs integral to vaccine decision making among women of different races/ethnicities can lead to tailored interventions to improve vaccine acceptance.