Behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation in the US: a longitudinal study March─ October 2021

Many studies have examined behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation, but few have examined these drivers longitudinally. We sought to identify the drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation using the Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination (BeSD) Framework. Participants were a nationally-representative sample of 1,563 US adults who had not received a COVID-19 vaccine by baseline. Participants took surveys online at baseline (spring 2021) and follow-up (fall 2021). The surveys assessed variables from BeSD Framework domains (i.e., thinking and feeling, social processes, and practical issues), COVID-19 vaccination initiation, and demographics at baseline and follow-up. Between baseline and follow-up, 65% of respondents reported initiating COVID-19 vaccination. Vaccination intent increased from baseline to follow-up (p < .01). Higher vaccine confidence, more positive social norms towards vaccination, and receiving vaccine recommendations at baseline predicted subsequent COVID-19 vaccine initiation (all p < .01). Among factors assessed at follow-up, social responsibility and vaccine requirements had the greatest associations with vaccine initiation (all p < .01). Baseline vaccine confidence, social norms, and vaccination recommendations were associated with subsequent vaccine initiation, all of which could be useful targets for behavioral interventions. Furthermore, interventions that highlight social responsibility to vaccinate or promote vaccination requirements could also be beneficial.

Barriers to Cervical Cancer Screening by Sexual Orientation Among Low-Income Women in North Carolina

We sought to examine cervical cancer screening barriers by sexual orientation among low-income women in North Carolina. The MyBodyMyTest-3 Trial recruited low-income women (< 250% of federal poverty level) aged 25-64 years who were 1+ year overdue for cervical cancer screening. We compared perceptions of cervical cancer screening among those who self-identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or queer (LGBQ; n = 70) to straight/heterosexual women (n = 683). For both LGBQ and straight respondents, the greatest barriers to screening were lack of health insurance (63% and 66%) and cost (49% and 50%). LGBQ respondents were more likely than straight respondents to report forgetting to screen (16% vs. 8%, p = .05), transportation barriers (10% vs. 2%, p = .001), and competing mental or physical health problems (39% vs. 27%, p = .10). Addressing access remains important for improving cervical cancer screening among those under-screened. For LGBQ women, additional attention may be needed for reminders, co-occurring health needs, and transportation barriers.

Identifying Healthcare Professionals With Lower Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Recommendation Quality: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Strengthening healthcare professionals' (HCPs) communication is an evidence-based approach to increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake among adolescents. To better target future interventions, we sought to synthesize evidence on HCP subgroups who most need to improve their HPV vaccine recommendation quality.

METHODS

We searched five databases for quantitative studies published from 2012 to 2022 on HPV vaccine recommendation quality, including recommendation consistency and strength, for United States adolescents. Two coders independently abstracted data from each eligible study, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We summarized variation in recommendation quality by clinical and HCP characteristics.

RESULTS

The 28 eligible studies indicated that relatively low proportions of HCPs used higher-quality recommendation practices (median: 61% across 30 measures) and that recommendation quality varied across HCP subgroups. The most consistent findings were that more pediatric HCPs used higher-quality recommendations than family medicine HCPs (8 of 11 studies, 2-60 percentage point difference) and that HPV-related knowledge was associated with higher recommendation quality (four of seven studies). Most studies observed no differences in recommendation quality by clinical role (e.g., provider vs. nurse) or HCP demographics (e.g., gender, age, race/ethnicity).

DISCUSSION

Studies suggest a substantial need to improve HCPs' recommendation quality, with opportunities for targeting future interventions.

Uncontrolled vaping and restraint strategies: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about uncontrolled vaping, defined as vaping more than the user prefers. We sought to understand e-cigarette users' experiences with uncontrolled vaping and how they restrain their vaping.

METHODS

Participants were 24 US adult e-cigarette users recruited in 2021. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews about uncontrolled vaping and restraint strategies and analyzed findings based on behavioral categories described in the Process Model of Self-Control.

RESULTS

While most participants (21 of 24) described experiences of uncontrolled vaping, some expressed ambivalence about how much they vaped. To restrain vaping, willpower was rarely used and was not perceived as effective. Distraction, deployment of attention away from the urge to vape, and reappraisal, thinking differently about vaping such as reminding oneself of health consequences, were common and helped some participants limit use in the moment of wanting to vape. Participants described using both situation selection, choosing to be in situations where e-cigarette use was less possible, and situation modification, modifying their circumstances to restrict opportunities to vape.

DISCUSSION

Uncontrolled vaping is not yet a well-defined concept for many e-cigarette users. E-cigarette users employed proactive situational strategies that required planning ahead to restrain use and found these strategies more effective compared to reactive strategies. Tobacco control programs and interventions should consider leveraging restraint strategies that people who vape are naturally using and perceive to be effective.

Effects of Modified Risk Tobacco Product Claims on Consumer Responses

INTRODUCTION

US tobacco manufacturers can seek authorization from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to market products using modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims. To inform regulatory decisions, we examined the impact of MRTP claim specificity and content, including whether the claims produced halo effects (ie, inferring health benefits beyond what is stated).

AIMS AND METHODS

Participants were 3161 US adult cigarette smokers. Using a two (general vs. specific) × 2 (risk vs. exposure) plus independent control design, we randomized participants to view one message from these conditions: general risk claim (eg, "smoking-related diseases"), general exposure claim (eg, "chemicals in smoke"), specific risk claim (eg, "lung cancer"), specific exposure claim (eg, "arsenic"), or control. Claims described the benefits of completely switching from cigarettes to the heated tobacco product IQOS.

RESULTS

MRTP claims of any sort elicited a higher willingness to try IQOS relative to control (d = 0.09, p = .043). Claims also elicited lower perceived risk of disease and exposure to harmful chemicals for completely switching from cigarettes to IQOS (d = -0.32 and -0.31) and partially switching (d = -0.25 and d = -0.26; all p < .05). Relative to specific MRTP claims, general MRTP claims led to lower perceived risk and exposure for complete switching (d = -0.13 and d = -0.16) and partial switching (d = -0.14 and d = -0.12; all p < .05). Risk and exposure MRTP claims had similar effects (all p > .05).

DISCUSSION

MRTP claims led to lower perceived risk and exposure, and higher willingness to try IQOS. General claims elicited larger effects than specific claims. MRTP claims also promoted unintended halo effects (eg, lower perceived risk of disease and chemical exposure for partial switching).

IMPLICATIONS

We found evidence that MRTP claims promoted health halo effects. In light of these findings, the FDA should require research on halo effects prior to authorization. Further, if an MRTP claim is authorized, FDA should require tobacco manufacturers to conduct post-market surveillance of how the claim affects consumer understanding, including partial switching perceived risk and exposure beliefs, as well as monitoring of dual-use behaviors.

Impact of visit characteristics on intention to recommend HPV vaccine: An experiment with US health care professionals

OBJECTIVE

Presumptive recommendations that assume parents want to vaccinate can increase human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake. We sought to examine how visit characteristics affect health care professionals' (HCPs) intention to use this evidence-based recommendation style.

METHODS

In 2022, we conducted an online experiment with 2527 HCPs who had a role in adolescent vaccination in the United States. Participants read 1 of 8 randomly assigned vignettes about a well-child visit. Using a 2 × 2 × 2 between-subjects factorial design, the vignettes varied the following visit characteristics: patient age (9 vs. 12-year-old), prior parental vaccine refusal (yes vs. no), and time pressure on the HCP (low vs. high). HCPs reported on their intention to use a presumptive HPV vaccine recommendation, as well as on related attitudes, subjective norms, and self-efficacy. Analyses used 3-way analysis of variance and parallel mediation.

RESULTS

Participants were pediatricians (26%), family/general medicine physicians (22%), advanced practitioners (24%), and nursing staff (28%). Overall, about two-thirds of HCPs (64%) intended to use a presumptive recommendation. Intentions were higher for older children (b = 0.23) and parents without prior vaccine refusal (b = 0.39, both p < 0.001). Time pressure had no main effect or interactions. HCPs' attitudes and self-efficacy partially mediated effects of patient age and prior vaccine refusal (range of b = 0.04-0.28, all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

To better support visits with younger children and parents who have refused vaccines, HCPs may need more training for making presumptive recommendations for HPV vaccine. Reinforcing positive attitudes and self-efficacy can help HCPs adopt this evidence-based recommendation style.

Framing of national HPV vaccine recommendations and willingness to recommend at ages 9-10

Proactive HPV vaccination at age 9 better prevents infection and improves vaccine series completion. Because national organizations recommend starting the vaccine at different ages, we sought to understand the impact of these recommendation frames. In 2022, we surveyed 2,527 US clinical staff (45% physicians) who provide HPV vaccine for children. We randomized respondents to one of three frames based on HPV vaccine recommendations of national organizations or a no-recommendation control, and assessed willingness to recommend HPV vaccine for children ages 9-10. Respondents also reported perceived benefits of HPV vaccination at ages 9 or 12. Recommending HPV vaccination "at ages 11-12" led to lower willingness to vaccinate at ages 9-10 than control (37% vs. 54%, p < .05). Recommending vaccination "at ages 9-12" led to similar willingness as control. However, "starting at age 9" led to higher willingness than control (63% vs. 54%, p < .05). Results were similar across respondents' training, specialty, or years in practice, or their clinic's rurality or healthcare system membership. More common benefits of recommending at age 9 than 12 were avoiding the topic of sex (24% vs. 10%, OR = 2.78, 95%CI: 2.23, 3.48) and completing the vaccine series before age 13 (56% vs. 47%, OR = 1.44, 95%CI: 1.23, 1.68). Less common benefits for age 9 were having parents ready to talk about HPV vaccine and agreeing to vaccination (both p < .05). An effective way to encourage proactive HPV vaccination is to say that it starts at age 9. Aligning national recommendations to start at age 9 can promote timely vaccination.

Addressing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in rural community pharmacies: a protocol for a stepped wedge randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines remains problematically low in the USA, especially in rural areas. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is associated with lower uptake, which translates to higher susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 variants in communities where vaccination coverage is low. Because community pharmacists are among the most accessible and trusted health professionals in rural areas, this randomized clinical trial will examine implementation strategies to support rural pharmacists in delivering an adapted evidence-based intervention to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

METHODS

We will use an incomplete stepped wedge trial design in which we will randomize 30 rural pharmacies (unit of analysis) to determine the effectiveness and incremental cost-effectiveness of a standard implementation approach (consisting of online training that describes the vaccine hesitancy intervention, live webinar, and resource website) compared to adding on a virtual facilitation approach (provided by a trained facilitator in support of the delivery of the vaccine hesitancy counseling intervention by pharmacists). The intervention (ASORT) has been adapted from an evidence-based vaccine communication intervention for HPV vaccines through a partnership with rural pharmacies in a practice-based research network in seven southern US states. ASORT teaches pharmacists how to identify persons eligible for COVID-19 vaccination (including a booster), solicit and address vaccine concerns in a non-confrontational way, recommend the vaccine, and repeat the steps later if needed. The primary trial outcome is fidelity to the ASORT intervention, which will be determined through ratings of recordings of pharmacists delivering the intervention. The secondary outcome is the effectiveness of the intervention, determined by rates of patients who agree to be vaccinated after receiving the intervention. Other secondary outcomes include feasibility, acceptability, adoption, reach, and cost. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses will be conducted to maximize the potential for future dissemination and sustainability. Mixed methods will provide triangulation, expansion, and explanation of quantitative findings.

DISCUSSION

This trial contributes to a growing evidence base on vaccine hesitancy interventions and virtual-only facilitation of evidenced-based practices in community health settings. The trial will provide the first estimate of the relative value of different implementation strategies in pharmacy settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05926544 (clinicaltrials.gov); 07/03/2023.

Terms tobacco users employ to describe e-cigarette aerosol

BACKGROUND

The scientific term for the substance people inhale and exhale from a vaping device is 'aerosol', but whether the public uses this term is unclear. To inform tobacco control communication efforts, we sought to understand what tobacco users call e-cigarette aerosols.

METHODS

Participants were a national convenience sample of 1628 US adults who used e-cigarettes, cigarettes or both (dual users). In an online survey, conducted in spring 2021, participants described what 'people inhale and exhale when they vape', using an open-ended and then a closed-ended response scale. Participants then evaluated warning statements, randomly assigned to contain the term 'aerosol' or 'vapor' (eg, 'E-cigarette aerosol/vapor contains nicotine, which can lead to seizures').

RESULTS

In open-ended responses, tobacco users most commonly provided the terms 'vapor' (31%) and 'smoke' (23%) but rarely 'aerosol' (<1%). In closed-ended responses, the most commonly endorsed terms were again 'vapor' (57%) and 'smoke' (22%) but again infrequently 'aerosol' (2%). In closed-ended responses, use of the term 'vapor' was more common than other terms among people who were older; white; gay, lesbian or bisexual; college educated; or vape users only (all p<0.05). In the experiment, warnings using the terms 'aerosol' and 'vapor' were equally effective (all p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The public rarely uses the term 'aerosol' to describe e-cigarette output, potentially complicating educational efforts that use the term. Future studies should explore public knowledge and understanding of the terms 'aerosol' and the more popular 'vapor' to better inform vaping risk communication.

Development of the UNC Perceived Message Effectiveness Scale for Youth

PURPOSE

Tobacco prevention media campaigns are an important tool to address youth tobacco use. We developed a theory-based perceived message effectiveness (PME) Scale to use when vetting messages for campaigns.

METHODS

Participants were a national sample of N=623 US adolescents (ages 13-17 years) recruited from a national probability-based panel. In an online experiment, we randomised adolescents to view tobacco prevention ads. All participants viewed an ad on smoking or vaping from the US Food and Drug Administration's The Real Cost campaign and a control video, in a random order. After ad exposure, we assessed PME using nine candidate items and constructs for convergent and criterion validity analyses. We used confirmatory factor analysis and examined information curves to select the scale items.

RESULTS

A brief PME scale with three items (α=0.95) worked equally well for demographically diverse adolescents with different patterns of tobacco use. The Real Cost ads generated higher PME scores than the control videos for both vaping and smoking (convergent validity; p<0.05). Higher PME scores were associated with greater attention, fear, cognitive elaboration and anticipated social interactions (convergent validity; r=0.31-0.66), as well as more negative attitudes toward and lower susceptibility to vaping and smoking (criterion validity; r=-0.14 to -0.37). A single-item PME measure performed similarly to the three-item version.

CONCLUSIONS

The University of North Carolina PME Scale for Youth is a reliable and valid measure of the potential effectiveness of vaping and smoking prevention ads. Employing PME scales during message development and selection may help youth tobacco prevention campaigns deploy more effective ads.

Cervical Cancer Screening Knowledge, Perceptions, and Behaviors in a Multiracial Cohort of Low-Income, Underscreened Women in North Carolina

Background: Underscreened, low-income, and uninsured or publicly insured women in the United States bear a greater burden of cervical cancer morbidity and mortality and may face unique barriers that preclude screening adherence. Methods: Participants were 710 My Body My Test-3 clinical trial participants who were publicly insured or uninsured with incomes ≤250% of the U.S. Federal Poverty Level, aged 25-64 years, and not up to date on cervical cancer screening as per national guidelines. Using Health Belief Model constructs, we assessed screening-related knowledge, perceptions, and behaviors-overall and stratified by race and ethnicity-and estimated associations with past-year attempted screening using multivariable regression models. Results: Overall, knowledge was low about the human papillomavirus, purpose of a Pap test, and recommended screening interval. Perceived severity of cervical cancer was high (3.63 on a 4-point scale). Black and Latina/Hispanic women were more likely to perceive screening as lowering their risk of cervical cancer than White women. Black women reported lower perceived risk of cervical cancer compared with White women (p = 0.03), but Black women were more likely to have sought screening in the past year (p = 0.01). Having at least three doctor visits in the past year was associated with a screening attempt. Greater perceived risk of cervical cancer, more positive perceptions of screening, and feeling more nervousness about screening were also associated with a screening attempt (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: Addressing knowledge gaps and misconceptions about cervical cancer screening and leveraging positive perceptions of screening may improve screening uptake and adherence among diverse underscreened U.S. women. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT02651883.

Rare ^{40}K Decay with Implications for Fundamental Physics and Geochronology

Potassium-40 is a widespread, naturally occurring isotope whose radioactivity impacts subatomic rare-event searches, nuclear structure theory, and estimated geological ages. A predicted electron-capture decay directly to the ground state of argon-40 has never been observed. The KDK (potassium decay) collaboration reports strong evidence of this rare decay mode. A blinded analysis reveals a nonzero ratio of intensities of ground-state electron-captures (I_{EC^{0}}) over excited-state ones (I_{EC^{*}}) of I_{EC^{0}}/I_{EC^{*}}=0.0095±[over stat]0.0022±[over sys]0.0010 (68% C.L.), with the null hypothesis rejected at 4σ. In terms of branching ratio, this signal yields I_{EC^{0}}=0.098%±[over stat]0.023%±[over sys]0.010%, roughly half of the commonly used prediction, with consequences for various fields [27L. Hariasz et al., companion paper, Phys. Rev. C 108, 014327 (2023)PRVCAN2469-998510.1103/PhysRevC.108.014327].

How to make effective HPV vaccine recommendations starting at age 9

This article provides best and promising practices for recommending HPV vaccination at age 9 as a way to ensure high uptake. An effective method for recommending HPV vaccination is the Announcement Approach, which consists of 3 evidence-based steps. The first step, Announce, involves noting that the child is 9 years old, saying they are due for a vaccine that prevents 6 HPV cancers, and saying you'll vaccinate today. This adapted version of the Announce step simplifies the bundled approach used at ages 11-12 that emphasizes the prevention of meningitis and whooping cough in addition to HPV cancers. For hesitant parents, the second step, Connect and Counsel, involves finding common ground with the parent and communicating the value of starting HPV vaccination at the first opportunity. Finally, for parents who decline, the third step is to Try Again at a later visit. Using the Announcement Approach at age 9 stands to increase HPV vaccine uptake, save time, and lead to high family and provider satisfaction.

Cost-effectiveness of Human Papillomavirus Self-collection Intervention on Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake among Underscreened U.S. Persons with a Cervix

BACKGROUND

We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection (followed by scheduling assistance for those who were HPV+ or inconclusive) compared with scheduling assistance only and usual care among underscreened persons with a cervix (PWAC).

METHODS

A decision tree analysis was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), or the cost per additional PWAC screened, from the Medicaid/state and clinic perspectives. A hypothetical cohort represented 90,807 low-income, underscreened individuals. Costs and health outcomes were derived from the MyBodyMyTest-3 randomized trial except the usual care health outcomes were derived from literature. We performed probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) to evaluate model uncertainty.

RESULTS

Screening uptake was highest in the self-collection alternative (n = 65,721), followed by the scheduling assistance alternative (n = 34,003) and usual care (n = 18,161). The self-collection alternative costs less and was more effective than the scheduling assistance alternative from the Medicaid/state perspective. Comparing the self-collection alternative with usual care, the ICERs were $284 per additional PWAC screened from the Medicaid/state perspective and $298 per additional PWAC screened from the clinic perspective. PSAs demonstrated that the self-collection alternative was cost-effective compared with usual care at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $300 per additional PWAC screened in 66% of simulations from the Medicaid/state perspective and 58% of simulations from the clinic perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with usual care and scheduling assistance, mailing HPV self-collection kits to underscreened individuals appears to be cost-effective in increasing screening uptake.

IMPACT

This is the first analysis to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of mailed self-collection in the United States.

Impact of Brief Quality Improvement Coaching on Adolescent HPV Vaccination Coverage: A Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Health departments in the United States routinely conduct quality improvement (QI) coaching to help primary care providers optimize vaccine delivery. In a prior trial focusing on multiple adolescent vaccines, this light-touch intervention yielded only short-term improvements in HPV vaccination. We sought to evaluate the impact of an enhanced, HPV vaccine-specific QI coaching intervention when delivered in person or virtually.

METHODS

We partnered with health departments in three states to conduct a pragmatic cluster randomized trial in 2015 to 2016. We randomized 224 primary care clinics to receive no intervention (control), in-person coaching, or virtual coaching. Health department staff delivered the brief (45-60 minute) coaching interventions, including HPV vaccine-specific training with assessment and feedback on clinics' vaccination coverage (i.e., proportion of patients vaccinated). States' immunization information systems provided data to assess coverage change for HPV vaccine initiation (≥1 doses) at 12-month follow-up, among patients ages 11 to 12 (primary outcome) and 13 to 17 (secondary outcome) at baseline.

RESULTS

Clinics served 312,227 patients ages 11 to 17. For ages 11 to 12, coverage change for HPV vaccine initiation was higher in the in-person and virtual coaching arms than in the control arm at 12-month follow-up (1.2% and 0.7% point difference, both P < 0.05). For ages 13 to 17, coverage change was higher for virtual coaching than control (1.4% point difference, P < 0.001), but in-person coaching did not yield an intervention effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Our brief QI coaching intervention produced small long-term improvements in HPV vaccination.

IMPACT

Health departments may benefit from targeting QI coaching to specific vaccines, like HPV vaccine, that need them most.

Optimising messages and images for e-cigarette warnings

BACKGROUND

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) to have a single addiction warning, but many other health harms are associated with vaping and warnings grow stale over time. We aimed to develop new warning messages and images to discourage e-cigarette use.

METHODS

Participants were 1629 US adults who vaped or smoked. We randomised each participant to evaluate 7 of 28 messages on newly developed warning themes (metals exposure, DNA mutation, cardiovascular problems, chemical exposure, lung damage, impaired immunity, addiction), and the current FDA-required warning (total of 8 messages). Then, participants evaluated images of hazards (eg, metal), internal harms (eg, organ damage) or people experiencing harms.

RESULTS

Regarding intended effects, new warning themes all discouraged vaping more than the current FDA-required warning (all p<0.001), led to greater negative affect (all p<0.001) and led to more anticipated social interactions (all p<0.001). The most discouraging warnings were about toxic metals exposure. Regarding unintended effects, the new themes led to more stigma against people who vape (6 of 7 themes, p<0.001) and led to a greater likelihood of thinking vaping is more harmful than smoking (all 7 themes, p<0.001), although unintended effects were smaller than intended effects. Images of harms (internal or people experiencing) discouraged vaping more than images of hazards (all p<0.001).

DISCUSSION

Vaping warning policies should communicate a broader range of hazards and harms, beyond addiction, to potentially increase awareness of health harms. Images of internal harm or people experiencing harms may be particularly effective at discouraging vaping.

Examining the Longitudinal Relationship Between Perceived and Actual Message Effectiveness: A Randomized Trial

We sought to examine the relationship between perceived message effectiveness (PME) and actual message effectiveness (AME) in a 3-week randomized trial of vaping prevention advertisements. Participants were US adolescents (n = 1,514) recruited in 2021. We randomly assigned them to view The Real Cost vaping prevention ads or control videos online. Participants viewed three videos at Visit 1, again at Visits 2 and 3, and completed a survey at each visit that assessed AME (susceptibility to vaping) and two types of PME - effects perceptions (potential for behavioral impact) and message perceptions (potential for message processing). At Visit 4, AME was measured. Compared to control, The Real Cost ads led to improved AME (lower susceptibility to vaping at Visit 4, p < .001). This was anticipated by The Real Cost ads eliciting higher PME ratings (higher effects and message perceptions at Visit 1, both p < .001). Furthermore, PME (both effects and message perceptions) at Visit 1 predicted susceptibility to vaping at Visits 1, 2, 3, and 4 (all p < .001). Finally, effects perceptions fully mediated the impact of The Real Cost ads on susceptibility to vaping (β = -.30; p < .001), while message perceptions only partially mediated the effect (β = -.04; p = .001). Our findings indicate a relationship between PME and AME, especially effects perceptions, and suggest that PME may be useful in message pre-testing to select messages with greater behavior change potential.

Getting Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Back on Track: A National Survey

PURPOSE

Adolescent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake in the United States dropped during the COVID-19 pandemic due to a decrease in well visits. This study sought to identify opportunities for primary care professionals (PCPs) to get adolescent vaccination back on track.

METHODS

In early 2021, we recruited 1,047 PCPs (71% physicians) who provided adolescent vaccines in the United States from an existing panel. Participants completed an online survey about changes in adolescent HPV vaccine uptake and actions taken to promote vaccination during the pandemic, as well as intentions to engage in activities to increase adolescent vaccination in the next 3 months.

RESULTS

A substantial proportion of PCPs (43%) reported that HPV vaccine uptake decreased in the first year of the pandemic; few (7%) PCPs reported an increase in uptake. PCPs reporting increased uptake were more likely to have used nurse-only vaccination visits, held drop-in and drive-through vaccination clinics, and used telehealth visits to recommend vaccination (all p < .05). Nearly two-thirds (62%) of all PCPs planned to promote adolescent vaccine uptake in the next 3 months. Planning was more common among PCPs who believed HPV vaccine uptake at their clinics increased during the pandemic, who saw more than 10 adolescent patients per week, who had ever reviewed their clinic's vaccination rates, and were nurses (all p < .05).

DISCUSSION

Many PCPs saw HPV vaccination drop during the pandemic. Several interventions could help clinics get HPV vaccination back on track, including increasing the availability of nurse-only vaccination visits and vaccination-only clinics.

Effect of HPV self-collection kits on cervical cancer screening uptake among under-screened women from low-income US backgrounds (MBMT-3): a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Most cervical cancer in the USA occurs in under-screened women. The My Body, My Test-3 (MBMT-3) trial sought to assess the efficacy of mailed human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection kits with appointment-scheduling assistance to increase uptake of cervical cancer screening among under-screened women from low-income backgrounds compared with scheduling assistance alone.

METHODS

MBMT-3 is a phase 3, open-label, two-arm, randomised controlled trial. Participants were recruited from 22 counties in North Carolina state, USA, and we partnered with 21 clinics across these counties. Participants were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 25-64 years, had an intact cervix, were uninsured or enrolled in Medicaid or Medicare, had an income of 250% or less of the US Federal Poverty Level, were living within the catchment area of a trial-associated clinic, and were overdue for screening (ie, Papanicolaou test ≥4 years ago or high-risk HPV test ≥6 years ago). Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive a mailed HPV self-collection kit and assistance for scheduling a free screening appointment (intervention group) or to receive scheduling assistance alone (control group). Randomisation was conducted by county using permuted blocks of nine patients and assignment to group was not masked. Participants in the intervention group were mailed HPV self-collection kits to collect a cervical-vaginal sample and return it by mail for testing. Samples were tested with the Aptima HPV assay (Hologic, San Diego, CA, USA), and participants were informed of high-risk HPV results by telephone call. Trial staff made up to three telephone call attempts to provide scheduling assistance for in-clinic screening for all participants. The primary outcome was cervical cancer screening uptake (ie, attending an in-clinic screening appointment or testing negative for high-risk HPV with a returned self-collected sample) within 6 months of enrolment in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02651883, and has been completed.

FINDINGS

Recruitment occurred between April 11, 2016, and Dec 16, 2019. 4256 women contacted the trial to participate, of whom 899 (21%) were eligible for inclusion and 697 (78%) returned consent forms. Of those who consented, 461 (66%) women were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 236 (34%) women were randomly assigned to the control group. We excluded 32 ineligible women post-randomisation, leaving 665 for primary analysis. Screening uptake was higher in the intervention group (317 [72%] of 438) than control group (85 [37%] of 227; risk ratio 1·93, 95% CI 1·62-2·31). Among intervention participants, 341 (78%) of 438 returned a self-collection kit. Three participants reported hurt or injury when using the self-collection kit; no participants withdrew due to adverse effects.

INTERPRETATION

Among under-screened women from low-income backgrounds, mailed HPV self-collection kits with scheduling assistance led to greater uptake of cervical cancer screening than scheduling assistance alone. At-home HPV self-collection testing has the potential to increase screening uptake among under-screened women.

FUNDING

National Cancer Institute.

Longitudinal transitions in e-cigarette and cigarette use among US adults: prospective cohort study

Background

To support tobacco control efforts, this study sought to characterize longitudinal transitions in use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and cigarettes.

Methods

Participants were nationally representative samples of 53,729 US adults from Waves 3-5 (2015-2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. We examined behavioral transitions (initiation, relapse, progression, and cessation) in ENDS and cigarette use across waves. Weighted generalized estimating equation models adjusted for sociodemographic variables.

Findings

Of never ENDS users at baseline, an estimated 1.7% reported initiating ENDS use by follow-up. Of former ENDS users, an estimated 12.1% relapsed into ENDS use. Of periodic ENDS users at baseline, 13% progressed to established ENDS use. Of baseline current ENDS users, 46.3% discontinued ENDS use. The corresponding transitions for cigarette smoking were 1.6% (initiation), 4.8% (relapse), 21.1% (progression), and 14% (discontinuation). Adults aged 18-24 (vs. older age), Hispanics (vs. non-Hispanic white), and past 12-month cannabis users were more likely to initiate ENDS or cigarettes (all p < 0.05). Having any internalizing mental health symptoms increased the odds of ENDS initiation, while externalizing symptoms increased the odds of cigarette initiation. Those who perceived nicotine as very harmful (vs. none/low harm) were more likely to discontinue ENDS. Current cigarette users (vs. non-users) at baseline were more likely to initiate, relapse, or discontinue ENDS (all p < 0.05) and vice versa.

Interpretation

We observed high changeability in ENDS and cigarette use among US adults over time. In absolute terms, ENDS use grew, while smoking fell. Tobacco control programs should focus on priority populations, including young adults and people with internalizing and externalizing mental health symptoms.

Funding

National Institutes of Health, R01-CA246606-01A1, R01-DA048390.

Human papillomavirus vaccination at the first opportunity: An overview

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has recommended human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for adolescents in the United States since 2006. Though recommended at a similar time to the routine recommendations for adolescent tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccination (Tdap) and quadrivalent meningococcal vaccination (MCV4), HPV vaccine uptake has consistently lagged behind these other adolescent vaccines. The ACIP recommends HPV vaccination at 11-12 y, with vaccination starting at 9 y of age included as an option that is routinely encouraged by the American Academy of Pediatrics and American Cancer Society. To support efforts to increase HPV vaccination at the first opportunity, this commentary summarizes the current HPV vaccination recommendations and available evidence regarding HPV vaccination starting at 9 y - including recent studies and trials documenting the effectiveness of HPV vaccination at 9 in supporting vaccine series completion, while providing future directions for research and implementation to improve HPV vaccination.

The Association of Reported Experiences of Racial and Ethnic Discrimination in Health Care with COVID-19 Vaccination Status and Intent - United States, April 22, 2021-November 26, 2022

In 2021, the CDC Director declared that racism is a serious threat to public health,* reflecting a growing awareness of racism as a cause of health inequities, health disparities, and disease. Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19-related hospitalization and death (1,2) illustrate the need to examine root causes, including experiences of discrimination. This report describes the association between reported experiences of discrimination in U.S. health care settings and COVID-19 vaccination status and intent to be vaccinated by race and ethnicity during April 22, 2021-November 26, 2022, based on the analysis of interview data collected from 1,154,347 respondents to the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM). Overall, 3.5% of adults aged ≥18 years reported having worse health care experiences compared with persons of other races and ethnicities (i.e., they experienced discrimination), with significantly higher percentages reported by persons who identified as non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) (10.7%), non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) (7.2%), non-Hispanic multiple or other race (multiple or other race) (6.7%), Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) (4.5%), non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (NHOPI) (3.9%), and non-Hispanic Asian (Asian) (2.8%) than by non-Hispanic White (White) persons (1.6%). Unadjusted differences in prevalence of being unvaccinated against COVID-19 among respondents reporting worse health care experiences than persons of other races and ethnicities compared with those who reported that their health care experiences were the same as those of persons of other races and ethnicities were statistically significant overall (5.3) and for NHOPI (19.2), White (10.5), multiple or other race (5.7), Black (4.6), Asian (4.3), and Hispanic (2.6) adults. Findings were similar for vaccination intent. Eliminating inequitable experiences in health care settings might help reduce some disparities in receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine.

Expanding the analysis of mechanisms of action in behavioral interventions: cognitive change versus cognitive activation

OBJECTIVE

To understand the mechanisms of action underlying behavioral interventions, researchers typically examine whether the treatment changes cognitions and whether changes in cognition predict behavior (cognitive change). This current research explores an alternative mechanism whereby the intervention increases the impact of pre-existing cognitions on behavior (cognitive activation). We tested whether cognitive change or cognitive activation explains the impact of cigarette pack messages on smoking restraint.

DESIGN

The research comprised a validation experiment (N = 135) and a 4-week RCT (N = 719) with smokers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

At both baseline and follow-up of the RCT, smokers self-reported threat appraisals, coping appraisals, and smoking restraint.

RESULTS

Intervention messages heightened the accessibility of threat appraisals compared to control messages (validation experiment). In the RCT, smoking restraint increased among intervention participants but not controls. Trial arm showed no corresponding change in threat or coping appraisals. However, trial arm interacted with baseline health cognitions such that synergies between threat appraisal components, and between threat appraisals and coping appraisals, predicted smoking restraint for intervention participants but not for controls.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support a cognitive activation process whereby health messages on cigarette packs increase the impact of pre-existing threat appraisals on smoking restraint.

A qualitative study of behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake among unvaccinated Americans in the US April-May 2021

INTRODUCTION

Around one-third of Americans reported they were unwilling to get a COVID-19 vaccine in April 2021. This focus group study aimed to provide insights on the factors contributing to unvaccinated adults' hesitancy or refusal to get vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines.

METHOD

Ipsos recruited 59 unvaccinated US adults who were vaccine hesitant (i.e., conflicted about or opposed to receiving a COVID-19 vaccination) using the Ipsos KnowledgePanel. Trained facilitators led a total of 10 focus groups via video-conference in March and April 2021. Two coders manually coded the data from each group using a coding frame based on the focus group discussion guide. The coding team collaborated in analyzing the data for key themes.

RESULTS

Data analysis of transcripts from the focus groups illuminated four main themes associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: lack of trust in experts and institutions; concern about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines; resistance towards prescriptive guidance and restrictions; and, despite personal reluctance or unwillingness to get vaccinated, acceptance of others getting vaccinated.

DISCUSSION

Vaccine confidence communication strategies should address individual concerns, describe the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination, and highlight evolving science using factural and neutral presentations of information to foster trust.

Recommending COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents in primary care

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccines are available for adolescents in the United States, but many parents are hesitant to have their children vaccinated. The advice of primary care professionals strongly influences vaccine uptake.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the willingness of primary care professionals (PCPs) to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents.

METHODS

Participants were a national sample of 1,047 US adolescent primary care professionals. They participated in an online survey in early 2021, after a COVID-19 vaccine had been approved for adults but before approval for adolescents. Respondents included physicians (71%), advanced practice providers (17%), and nurses (12%). We identified correlates of willingness to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents using logistic regression.

RESULTS

The majority (89%) of respondents were willing to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents, with advanced practice providers and nurses being less likely than paediatricians to recommend vaccination (84% vs. 94%, aOR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23-0.92). Respondents who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine were more likely to recommend adolescent vaccination (92% vs. 69%, aOR 4.20, 95% CI 2.56-6.87) as were those with more years in practice (94% vs. 88%, aOR 2.93, 95% CI 1.79-4.99). Most respondents (96%) said they would need some measure of support in order to provide COVID-19 vaccination to adolescents, with vaccine safety and efficacy information being the most commonly cited need (80%).

CONCLUSION

Adolescent primary care professionals were generally willing to recommend COVID-19 vaccination. However, most indicated a need for additional resources to be able to administer COVID-19 vaccines at their clinic.

The Impact of The Real Cost Vaping and Smoking Ads across Tobacco Products

INTRODUCTION

Little research has examined the spillover effects of tobacco communication campaigns, such as how anti-smoking ads affect vaping.

AIMS AND METHODS

Participants were a national sample of 623 U.S. adolescents (ages 13-17 years) from a probability-based panel. In a between-subjects experiment, we randomly assigned adolescents to view one of four videos online: (1) a smoking prevention video ad from the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) The Real Cost campaign, (2) a neutral control video about smoking, (3) a vaping prevention video ad from The Real Cost campaign, or (4) a neutral control video about vaping. We present effect sizes as Cohen's d, standardized mean differences, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Exposure to The Real Cost vaping prevention ads led to more negative attitudes toward vaping compared with control (d = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.07, 0.53), while exposure to The Real Cost smoking prevention ads did not affect smoking-related outcomes compared with control (p-values > .05). Turning to spillover effects, exposure to The Real Cost smoking prevention ads led to less susceptibility to vaping (d = -0.34, 95% CI: -0.56, -0.12), more negative attitudes toward vaping (d = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.65) and higher perceived likelihood of harm from vaping (d = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.48), compared with control. Exposure to The Real Cost vaping prevention ads did not affect smoking-related outcomes compared with control (p-values > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This experiment found evidence of beneficial spillover effects of smoking prevention ads on vaping outcomes and found no detrimental effects of vaping prevention ads on smoking outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS

Little research has examined the spillover effects of tobacco communication campaigns, such as how anti-smoking ads affect vaping. Using a national sample of 623 U.S. adolescents, we found beneficial evidence of spillover effects of smoking prevention ads on vaping outcomes, which is promising since it suggests that smoking prevention campaigns may have the additional benefit of reducing both smoking and vaping among adolescents. Additionally, we found that vaping prevention campaigns did not elicit unintended consequences on smoking-related outcomes, an important finding given concerns that vaping prevention campaigns could drive youth to increase or switch to using combustible cigarettes instead of vaping.

Behavioral and Social Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccination in the United States, August-November 2021

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and widely available, but many adults in the U.S. have not been vaccinated for COVID-19. This study examined the associations between behavioral and social drivers of vaccination with COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the U.S. adults and their prevalence by region.

METHODS

A nationally representative sample of U.S. adults participated in a cross-sectional telephone survey in August-November 2021; the analysis was conducted in January 2022. Survey questions assessed self-reported COVID-19 vaccine initiation, demographics, and behavioral and social drivers of vaccination.

RESULTS

Among the 255,763 respondents, 76% received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccine uptake was higher among respondents aged ≥75 years (94%), females (78%), and Asian non-Hispanic people (94%). The drivers of vaccination most strongly associated with uptake included higher anticipated regret from nonvaccination, risk perception, and confidence in vaccine safety and importance, followed by work- or school-related vaccination requirements, social norms, and provider recommendation (all p<0.05). The direction of association with uptake varied by reported level of difficulty in accessing vaccines. The prevalence of all of these behavioral and social drivers of vaccination was highest in the Northeast region and lowest in the Midwest and South.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationally representative survey found that COVID-19 vaccine uptake was most strongly associated with greater anticipated regret, risk perception, and confidence in vaccine safety and importance, followed by vaccination requirements and social norms. Interventions that leverage these social and behavioral drivers of vaccination have the potential to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and could be considered for other vaccine introductions.

Explaining demographic differences in COVID-19 vaccination stage in the United States - April-May 2021

COVID-19 vaccine coverage in the US has marked demographic and geographical disparities, but few explanations exist for them. Our paper aimed to identify behavioral and social drivers that explain these vaccination disparities. Participants were a national probability sample of 3562 American adults, recruited from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel. Participants completed an online survey in spring 2021, when COVD-19 vaccination was available for higher-risk groups but not yet available to all US adults. The survey assessed COVID-19 vaccination stage (intentions and vaccine uptake), constructs from the Increasing Vaccination Model (IVM) domains (thinking and feeling, social processes, and direct behavior change), self-reported exposure to COVID-19 vaccine information, and demographic characteristics. Analyses used multiple imputation to address item nonresponse and linear regressions to conduct mediation analyses. Higher COVID-19 vaccination stage was strongly associated with older age, liberal political ideology, and higher income in adjusted analyses (all p < .001). Vaccination stage was more modestly associated with urbanicity, white race, and Hispanic ethnicity (all p < .05). Some key mediators that explained more than one-third of demographic differences in vaccination stage were perceived vaccine effectiveness, social norms, and recommendations from family and friends across most demographic characteristics (all p < .05). Other mediators included safety concerns, trust, altruism, provider recommendation, and information seeking. Access to vaccination, barriers to vaccination, and self-efficacy explained few demographic differences. One of the most reliable explanations for demographic differences in COVID-19 vaccination stage is social processes, including social norms, recommendations, and altruism. Interventions to promote COVID-19 vaccination should address social processes and other domains in the IVM.

Recruitment strategies and HPV self-collection return rates for under-screened women for cervical cancer prevention

In the United States, medically underserved women carry a heavier burden of cancer incidence and mortality, yet are largely underrepresented in cancer prevention studies. My Body, My Test is a n observational cohort, multi-phase cervical cancer prevention study in North Carolina that recruited low-income women, aged 30-65 years and who had not undergone Pap testing in ≥ 4 years. Participants were offered home-based self-collection of cervico-vaginal samples for primary HPV testing. Here, we aimed to describe the recruitment strategies utilized by study staff, and the resulting recruitment and self-collection kit return rates for each specific recruitment strategy. Participants were recruited through different approaches: either direct (active, staff-effort intensive) or indirect (passive on the part of study staff). Of a total of 1,475 individuals screened for eligibility, 695 were eligible (47.1%) and 487 (70% of eligible) participants returned their self-collection kit. Small media recruitment resulted in the highest number of individuals found to be study eligible, with a relatively high self-collection kit return of 70%. In-clinic in-reach resulted in a lower number of study-eligible women, yet had the highest kit return rate (90%) among those sent kits. In contrast, 211 recruitment which resulted in the lowest kit return of 54%. Small media, word of mouth, and face-to-face outreach resulted in self-collection kit return rates ranging from 72 to 79%. The recruitment strategies undertaken by study staff support the continued study of reaching under-screened populations into cervical cancer prevention studies.

Characteristics of the Moveable Middle: Opportunities Among Adults Open to COVID-19 Vaccination

INTRODUCTION

Focusing on subpopulations that express the intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccination but are unvaccinated may improve the yield of COVID-19 vaccination efforts.

METHODS

A nationally representative sample of 789,658 U.S. adults aged ≥18 years participated in the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module from May 2021 to April 2022. The survey assessed respondents' COVID-19 vaccination status and intent by demographic characteristics (age, urbanicity, educational attainment, region, insurance, income, and race/ethnicity). This study compared composition and within-group estimates of those who responded that they definitely or probably will get vaccinated or are unsure (moveable middle) from the first and last month of data collection.

RESULTS

Because vaccination uptake increased over the study period, the moveable middle declined among persons aged ≥18 years. Adults aged 18-39 years and suburban residents comprised most of the moveable middle in April 2022. Groups with the largest moveable middles in April 2022 included persons with no insurance (10%), those aged 18-29 years (8%), and those with incomes below poverty (8%), followed by non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (7%), non-Hispanic multiple or other race (6%), non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native persons (6%), non-Hispanic Black or African American persons (6%), those with below high school education (6%), those with high school education (5%), and those aged 30-39 years (5%).

CONCLUSIONS

A sizable percentage of adults open to receiving COVID-19 vaccination remain in several demographic groups. Emphasizing engagement of persons who are unvaccinated in some racial/ethnic groups, aged 18-39 years, without health insurance, or with lower income may reach more persons open to vaccination.

Drivers of COVID-19 policy stringency in 175 countries and territories: COVID-19 cases and deaths, gross domestic products per capita, and health expenditures

Background

New data on COVID-19 may influence the stringency of containment policies, but these potential effect are not understood. We aimed to understand the associations of new COVID-19 cases and deaths with policy stringency globally and regionally.

Methods

We modelled the marginal effects of new COVID-19 cases and deaths on policy stringency (scored 0-100) in 175 countries and territories, adjusting for gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and health expenditure (% of GDP), and public expenditure on health. The time periods examined were March to August 2020, September 2020 to February 2021, and March to August 2021.

Results

Policy response to new cases and deaths was faster and more stringent early in the COVID-19 pandemic (March to August 2020) compared to subsequent periods. New deaths were more strongly associated with stringent policies than new cases. In an average week, one new death per 100 000 people was associated with a stringency increase of 2.1 units in the March to August 2020 period, 1.3 units in the September 2020 to February 2021 period, and 0.7 units in the March to August 2021 period. New deaths in Africa and the Western Pacific were associated with more stringency than in other regions. Higher health expenditure as a percentage of GDP was associated with less stringent policies. Similarly, higher public expenditure on health by governments was mostly associated with less stringency across all three periods. GDP per capita did not have consistent patterns of associations with stringency.

Conclusions

The stringency of COVID-19 policies was more strongly associated with new deaths than new cases. Our findings demonstrate the need for enhanced mortality surveillance to ensure policy alignment during health emergencies. Countries that invest less in health or have a lower public expenditure on health may be inclined to enact more stringent policies. This new empirical understanding of COVID-19 policy drivers can help public health officials anticipate and shape policy responses in future health emergencies.

Human papillomavirus vaccination and cervical cancer risk

Persistent human papillomavirus infection is the central cause of cervical cancer, the leading cause of cancer death among women worldwide. Clear evidence from both randomized trials and population based studies shows that vaccination against human papillomavirus reduces the incidence of cervical pre-cancer. These data suggest that the vaccine reduces the incidence of cervical cancer. However, human papillomavirus vaccine coverage is inadequate in all countries, especially in low and middle income countries where disease burden is highest. Supply side strategies to improve coverage include increasing the availability of low cost vaccines, school located delivery, single dose vaccine schedules, and development of vaccines that do not need refrigeration. Demand side strategies include enhancing provider recommendations, correcting misinformation, and public awareness campaigns. The near elimination of cervical cancer is achievable through increased uptake of human papillomavirus vaccination and efforts to increase screening for cervical cancer, especially when enacted to reduce disparities in across the world.

Employer requirements and COVID-19 vaccination and attitudes among healthcare personnel in the U.S.: Findings from National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module, August - September 2021

INTRODUCTION

Employer vaccination requirements have been used to increase vaccination uptake among healthcare personnel (HCP). In summer 2021, HCP were the group most likely to have employer requirements for COVID-19 vaccinations as healthcare facilities led the implementation of such requirements. This study examined the association between employer requirements and HCP's COVID-19 vaccination status and attitudes about the vaccine.

METHODS

Participants were a national representative sample of United States (US) adults who completed the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM) during August-September 2021. Respondents were asked about COVID-19 vaccination and intent, requirements for vaccination, place of work, attitudes surrounding vaccinations, and sociodemographic variables. This analysis focused on HCP respondents. We first calculated the weighted proportion reporting COVID-19 vaccination for HCP by sociodemographic variables. Then we computed unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios for vaccination coverage and key indicators on vaccine attitudes, comparing HCP based on individual self-report of vaccination requirements.

RESULTS

Of 12,875 HCP respondents, 41.5% reported COVID-19 vaccination employer requirements. Among HCP with vaccination requirements, 90.5% had been vaccinated against COVID-19, as compared to 73.3% of HCP without vaccination requirements-a pattern consistent across sociodemographic groups. Notably, the greatest differences in uptake between HCP with and without employee requirements were seen in sociodemographic subgroups with the lowest vaccination uptake, e.g., HCP aged 18-29 years, HCP with high school or less education, HCP living below poverty, and uninsured HCP. In every sociodemographic subgroup examined, vaccine uptake was more equitable among HCP with vaccination requirements than in HCP without. Finally, HCP with vaccination requirements were also more likely to express confidence in the vaccine's safety (68.3% vs. 60.1%) and importance (89.6% vs 79.6%).

CONCLUSION

In a large national US sample, employer requirements were associated with higher and more equitable HCP vaccination uptake across all sociodemographic groups examined. Our findings suggest that employer requirements can contribute to improving COVID-19 vaccination coverage, similar to patterns seen for other vaccines.

Patient perspectives on cervical cancer screening interventions among underscreened women

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer is highly preventable with regular screening, yet over 4,000 women die from it annually in the United States. Over half of new cervical cancer cases in the U.S. are attributable to insufficient screening.

METHODS

Participants were 23 low-income, uninsured or Medicaid-insured women in North Carolina who were overdue for cervical cancer screening according to national guidelines. Semi-structured interviews examined perspectives on barriers to cervical cancer screening and on interventions to reduce these barriers. We also elicited feedback on three proposed evidence-based interventions: one-on-one education, coupons to reduce out-of-pocket costs, and self-collection of samples for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, the primary cause of cervical cancer.

RESULTS

Reported barriers included high cost, inconvenient clinic hours, lack of provider recommendation, poor transportation, difficulty finding a provider, fear of pain, and low perceived need. Participants suggested interventions including reducing cost, improving convenience through community-based screening or extended clinic hours, strengthening provider recommendations, and providing one-on-one counseling and education outreach. HPV self-collection was most frequently selected as the "most helpful" of 3 proposed interventions (n = 11), followed by reducing out-of-pocket costs (n = 7) and one-on-one education (n = 5).

CONCLUSION

Cost was the most reported barrier to cervical cancer screening, although women experience multiple simultaneous barriers. Novel interventions such as HPV self-collection promise to reduce some, but not all, barriers to primary screening. Interventions that work on reducing multiple barriers, including obstacles to receiving follow-up care, may be most effective to prevent cervical cancer among these high-risk women.

Geographic Heterogeneity in Behavioral and Social Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccination

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about how the drivers of COVID-19 vaccination vary across the U.S. To inform vaccination outreach efforts, this study explores geographic variation in correlates of COVID-19 nonvaccination among adults.

METHODS

Participants were a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults identified through random-digit dialing for the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module. Analyses examined the geographic and temporal landscape of constructs in the Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination Framework among unvaccinated respondents from May 2021 to December 2021 (n=531,798) and sociodemographic and geographic disparities and Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination predictors of COVID-19 nonvaccination from October 2021 to December 2021 (n=187,756).

RESULTS

National coverage with at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine was 79.3% by December 2021, with substantial geographic heterogeneity. Regions with the largest proportion of unvaccinated persons who would probably get a COVID-19 vaccine or were unsure resided in the Southeast and Midwest (Health and Human Services Regions 4 and 5). Both regions had similar temporal trends regarding concerns about COVID-19 and confidence in vaccine importance, although the Southeast had especially low confidence in vaccine safety in December 2021, lowest in Florida (5.5%) and highest in North Carolina (18.0%). The strongest Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination correlate of not receiving a COVID-19 vaccination was lower confidence in COVID-19 vaccine importance (adjusted prevalence ratio=5.19, 95% CI=4.93, 5.47; strongest in the Northeast, Southwest, and Mountain West and weakest in the Southeast and Midwest). Other Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination correlates also varied by region.

CONCLUSIONS

Contributors to nonvaccination showed substantial geographic heterogeneity. Strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccination uptake may need to be tailored regionally.

Vaccination barriers and drivers in Romania: a focused ethnographic study

BACKGROUND

In 2016-18, a large measles outbreak occurred in Romania identified by pockets of sub-optimally vaccinated population groups in the country. The aim of the current study was to gain insight into barriers and drivers from the experience of measles vaccination from the perspectives of caregivers and their providers.

METHODS

Data were collected by non-participant observation of vaccination consultations and individual interviews with health workers and caregivers in eight Romanian clinics with high or low measles vaccination uptake. Romanian stakeholders were involved in all steps of the study. The findings of this study were discussed during a workshop with key stakeholders.

RESULTS

Over 400 h of observation and 161 interviews were conducted. A clear difference was found between clinics with high and low measles vaccination uptake which indicates that being aware of and following recommended practices for both vaccination service delivery and conveying vaccine recommendations to caregivers may have an impact on vaccine uptake. Barriers identified were related to shortcomings in following recommended practices for vaccination consultations by health workers (e.g. correctly assessing contraindications or providing enough information to allow an informed decision). These observations were largely confirmed in interviews with caregivers and revealed significant knowledge gaps.

CONCLUSIONS

The identification of key barriers provided an opportunity to design specific interventions to improve vaccination service delivery (e.g. mobile vaccination clinics, use of an electronic vaccination registry system for scheduling of appointments) and build capacity among health workers (e.g. guidance and supporting materials and training programmes).

Crowdsourcing interventions to promote uptake of COVID-19 booster vaccines

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 booster vaccine uptake rates are behind the rate of primary vaccination in many countries. Governments and non-governmental institutions rely on a range of interventions aiming to increase booster uptake. Yet, little is known how experts and the general public evaluate these interventions.

METHODS

We applied a novel crowdsourcing approach to provide rapid insights on the most promising interventions to promote uptake of COVID-19 booster vaccines. In the first phase (December 2021), international experts (n = 78 from 17 countries) proposed 46 unique interventions. To reduce noise and potential bias, in the second phase (January 2022), experts (n = 307 from 34 countries) and representative general population samples from the UK (n = 299) and the US (n = 300) rated the proposed interventions on several evaluation criteria, including effectiveness and acceptability, on a 5-point Likert-type scale.

FINDINGS

Sanctions were evaluated as potentially most effective but least accepted. Evaluations by expert and general population samples were considerably aligned. Interventions that received the most positive evaluations regarding both effectiveness and acceptability across evaluation groups were: a day off work after getting vaccinated, financial incentives, tax benefits, promotional campaigns, and mobile vaccination teams.

INTERPRETATION

The results provide useful insights to help governmental and non-governmental institutions in their decisions about which interventions to implement. Additionally, the applied crowdsourcing method may be used in future studies to retrieve rapid insights on the comparative evaluation of (health) policies.

FUNDING

This study received funding from the Austrian Science Fund (SFB F63) and the University of Vienna.

Adolescents' Understanding of Smoking and Vaping Risk Language: Cognitive Interviews to Inform Scale Development

INTRODUCTION

Perceived message effectiveness (PME) is a common metric to understand receptivity to tobacco prevention messages, yet most measures have been developed with adults. We examined adolescents' interpretation of language within candidate items for a new youth-targeted PME measure using cognitive interviewing. We sought to understand the meaning adolescents assigned to our candidate PME items to improve item wording.

AIMS AND METHODS

Participants were 20 adolescents, ages 13-17 years from the United States. Cognitive interviews used a structured guide to elicit feedback on comprehension, answer retrieval, and language regarding a set of Reasoned Action Approach-based survey items that assessed the PME of smoking and vaping prevention ads. We employed thematic analysis to synthesize findings from the interviews.

RESULTS

Interviews identified three main issues related to survey items: ambiguity of language, word choice (risk and other terminology), and survey item phrasing. Adolescents preferred direct, definitive language over more ambiguous phrasing which they saw as less serious (eg, "will" instead of "could"). For risk terminology, they preferred terms such as "harmful" and "dangerous" over "risky," which was viewed as easy to discount. The term "negative effects" was interpreted as encompassing a broader set of tobacco harms than "health effects." Adolescents said that the term "vape" was preferable to "e-cigarette," and identified ways to simplify item wording for greater clarity.

CONCLUSIONS

Tobacco risk terms that appear similar differ in meaning to adolescents, and more direct and unambiguous language is preferred. Our findings informed changes to the PME scale items to improve clarity and reduce measurement error.

IMPLICATIONS

This study adds to the literature on how adolescents interpret tobacco prevention language. Adolescents may interpret terminology differently than adults, which could lead to ambiguity in meaning and thus measurement error. Through cognitive interviewing, we identified and improved the language in a youth-focused PME measure for tobacco and vaping prevention.

β-Delayed One and Two Neutron Emission Probabilities Southeast of ^{132}Sn and the Odd-Even Systematics in r-Process Nuclide Abundances

The β-delayed one- and two-neutron emission probabilities (P_{1n} and P_{2n}) of 20 neutron-rich nuclei with N≥82 have been measured at the RIBF facility of the RIKEN Nishina Center. P_{1n} of ^{130,131}Ag, ^{133,134}Cd, ^{135,136}In, and ^{138,139}Sn were determined for the first time, and stringent upper limits were placed on P_{2n} for nearly all cases. β-delayed two-neutron emission (β2n) was unambiguously identified in ^{133}Cd and ^{135,136}In, and their P_{2n} were measured. Weak β2n was also detected from ^{137,138}Sn. Our results highlight the effect of the N=82 and Z=50 shell closures on β-delayed neutron emission probability and provide stringent benchmarks for newly developed macroscopic-microscopic and self-consistent global models with the inclusion of a statistical treatment of neutron and γ emission. The impact of our measurements on r-process nucleosynthesis was studied in a neutron star merger scenario. Our P_{1n} and P_{2n} have a direct impact on the odd-even staggering of the final abundance, improving the agreement between calculated and observed Solar System abundances. The odd isotope fraction of Ba in r-process-enhanced (r-II) stars is also better reproduced using our new data.

Impact of Vaping Prevention Advertisements on US Adolescents: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Understanding whether prevention advertisements reduce susceptibility to vaping is important owing to concerning levels of adolescent vaping.

Objective

To examine whether vaping prevention advertisements from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) national Real Cost campaign lead to lower susceptibility to vaping among adolescents.

Design, Setting, and Participants

For this 3-group randomized clinical trial with parallel assignment, participants were US adolescents aged 13 to 17 years who were susceptible to vaping or current e-cigarette users, recruited from online panels. Adolescents were randomized to 1 of 2 Real Cost vaping prevention trial groups (health harms- or addiction-themed advertisements) or to a control group (investigator-created neutral videos about vaping). Adolescents completed 4 weekly online surveys at visits 1 to 4 over a 3-week period. Data were analyzed from December 1, 2021, to August 25, 2022.

Interventions

Adolescents saw 3 randomly ordered 30-second video advertisements online at each of 3 weekly study visits (visits 1, 2, and 3).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary trial outcome was susceptibility to vaping. Surveys also assessed susceptibility to smoking cigarettes to examine any spillover effects of vaping prevention advertisements on smoking outcomes. Both susceptibility measures had 3 items and ranged from 1 (indicating not susceptible) to 4 (indicating highly susceptible). The primary analyses compared Real Cost groups (combined) with the control group, while exploratory analyses compared the Real Cost groups with each other.

Results

Participants were 1514 adolescents (1140 [75.3%] boys; mean [SD] age, 15.22 [1.18] years), including 504 randomized to the Real Cost health harms group, 506 randomized to the Real Cost addiction group, and 504 randomized to the control group. Adolescents in the Real Cost groups (combined) had lower susceptibility to vaping at visit 4 than those in the control group (b = -0.21; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.10). The Real Cost groups did not differ from one another on susceptibility to vaping (visit 4: b = -0.05; 95% CI, -0.17 to 0.07). Adolescents in the Real Cost groups (combined) also had lower susceptibility to smoking cigarettes than those in the control group (b = -0.21; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.10). For both vaping and smoking, Real Cost groups had less positive attitudes (vaping: b = -0.27; 95% CI, -0.40 to -0.14; smoking: b = -0.23; 95% CI, -0.39 to -0.08) compared with the control group.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that vaping prevention advertisements from the FDA Real Cost campaign led to lower adolescent susceptibility to vaping and had beneficial spillover effects on cigarette smoking outcomes. Tobacco prevention campaigns can help reduce youth tobacco use.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04836455.

Is a cigarette brand with fewer chemicals safer? Public perceptions in two national US experiments

By law, the US government must publicly display the quantities of harmful chemicals in cigarettes by brand, but doing so could mislead people to incorrectly think that some cigarettes are safer than others. We evaluated formats for presenting chemical quantities side-by-side to see if any were misleading. We recruited US convenience (n = 604) and probability (n = 1440) samples. We randomized participants to 1 of 5 formats: checklist, point estimates, ranges, a visual risk indicator, or no-quantity control. Participants were far more likely to incorrectly endorse one cigarette brand as riskier than the other in the checklist (65% made error), point estimate (67-70%), range (64-67%), or risk indicator (68-75%) conditions as compared to the no-quantity control (1%, all p < .001). Among smokers, erroneous risk perceptions mediated the impact of quantity format on interest in switching brands. People viewing chemical quantities for cigarette brands side-by-side misperceived differences in risk, suggesting limited public health value of this information.

Identifying Promising Themes for Adolescent Vaping Warnings: A National Experiment

INTRODUCTION

Adolescent vaping remains a problem in the United States, yet little is known about what health warning themes most discourage vaping among adolescents. We sought to identify the most compelling themes for vaping warnings for US adolescents.

METHODS

Participants were a national probability sample of 623 US adolescents aged 13-17 years, recruited in the summer of 2020. Adolescents were randomized to one of the five warning message themes about the potential health effects of vaping: 1. chemical harms, 2. lung harms, 3. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) harms, 4. nicotine addiction, or 5. control (messages about vape litter). The primary outcome was perceived message effectiveness (PME; 3-item scale). Secondary outcomes were negative affect (fear), attention, anticipated social interactions, and message novelty.

RESULTS

Adolescents rated the chemical, lung, and COVID-19 harms warning messages higher on PME than nicotine addiction and control (all p < .05), while nicotine addiction was rated higher than control (p < .05). The chemical, lung, and COVID-19 harms warning themes also elicited greater negative affect than nicotine addiction and control (all p < .05). For all other secondary outcomes, the COVID-19 harms warning message theme was rated higher than nicotine addiction and control (all p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Adolescents perceived warning message themes about lung, chemical and COVID-19 health effects of vaping as more effective than nicotine addiction. To discourage vaping, the FDA and others should communicate to youth about the health effects of vaping beyond nicotine addiction.

IMPLICATIONS

Adolescents rated warning message themes about the lung, chemical, and COVID-19 health effects of vaping as more effective than nicotine addiction, while nicotine addiction was rated as more effective than control themes about vaping litter. To discourage vaping among adolescents, health messaging should expand message themes to communicate about a broader set of health effects of vaping beyond nicotine addiction.

Primary care professionals' support for Covid-19 vaccination mandates: Findings from a US national survey

Healthcare organizations have been early adopters of Covid-19 vaccine mandates as a strategy to end the pandemic. We sought to evaluate support for such mandates among pediatric primary care professionals (PCPs) in the United States. In February-March 2021, we conducted a national online survey of 1,047 PCPs (71% physicians). We used multivariable logistic regression to assess correlates of PCPs' support for Covid-19 vaccine mandates for health care workers. Most PCPs supported Covid-19 vaccine mandates for health care workers (83%). PCPs were more likely to support mandates if they perceived health care workers to be at highest risk of getting Covid-19 compared to other worker types (8 percentage points, p < 0.01). PCPs were also more likely to support mandates if their clinic recommended or required vaccination (11 percentage points and 20 percentage points respectively, both p < 0.01). However, PCPs were less likely to support mandates if their clinic offered incentives to vaccinate (10 percentage points, p < 0.05). Clinic recommendations and requirements for Covid-19 vaccination may increase support for mandates. Incentives may decrease support, perhaps by creating the perception that viable alternatives to mandates exist.

Coaching and Communication Training for HPV Vaccination: A Cluster Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

US health departments routinely conduct in-person quality improvement (QI) coaching to strengthen primary care clinics' vaccine delivery systems, but this intervention achieves only small, inconsistent improvements in human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. Thus, we sought to evaluate the effectiveness of combining QI coaching with remote provider communication training to improve impact.

METHODS

With health departments in 3 states, we conducted a pragmatic 4-arm cluster randomized clinical trial with 267 primary care clinics (76% pediatrics). Clinics received in-person QI coaching, remote provider communication training, both interventions combined, or control. Using data from states' immunization information systems, we assessed HPV vaccination among 176 189 patients, ages 11 to 17, who were unvaccinated at baseline. Our primary outcome was the proportion of those, ages 11 to 12, who had initiated HPV vaccination at 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

HPV vaccine initiation was 1.5% points higher in the QI coaching arm and 3.8% points higher in the combined intervention arm than in the control arm, among patients ages 11 to 12, at 12-month follow-up (both P < .001). Improvements persisted at 18-month follow-up. The combined intervention also achieved improvements for other age groups (ages 13-17) and vaccination outcomes (series completion). Remote communication training alone did not outperform the control on any outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining QI coaching with remote provider communication training yielded more consistent improvements in HPV vaccination uptake than QI coaching alone. Health departments and other organizations that seek to support HPV vaccine delivery may benefit from a higher intensity, multilevel intervention approach.