Considering Emotion in COVID-19 Vaccine Communication: Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy and Fostering Vaccine Confidence

Considering the impact of vaccine communication in the COVID-19 pandemic among adults in Canada: A qualitative study of lessons learned for future vaccine campaigns

We aimed to understand how experiences with vaccine-related information and communication challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic impacted motivations and behaviors among Canadian adults regarding future vaccines. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants purposively selected to ensure diversity in age, sex at birth, self-identified gender, and region. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis; findings were mapped to the Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills Model focusing on factors affecting vaccine hesitancy and uptake. Of 62 interviews completed, most were with woman (n = 32, 51.6%) and residents of Ontario (n = 36, 58.1%); the median age was 43.5 yr (interquartile range 23.3 yr). Themes included: 1) accessibility of information, 2) ability to assess information accuracy and validity, 3) trust in communications from practitioners and decision-makers, and 4) information seeking behaviors. Participants expressed various concerns about vaccines, including fears about potential side effects, particularly regarding the long-term effects of novel vaccinations. These concerns may reflect broader societal anxieties, which have been intensified by widespread misinformation and an overload of vaccine information. Moreover, participants highlighted a lack of trust in the information provided by government agencies and pharmaceutical companies, primarily driven by concerns regarding their underlying motives. Concerns about COVID-19 vaccine safety and effectiveness negatively impacted future vaccine attitudes and behaviors. Vaccine hesitancy studies should consider how individuals receive, perceive, and seek information within social contexts and risk profiles.

From Hesitancy to Acceptance: An Interpretative Approach to Unravel the Vaccination Motivation Among the Rural Population

Our study focuses on vaccination decisions within a collectivistic framework, prioritizing social and behavioral factors over individualistic views amidst COVID-19. Integrating behavioral biases and social ties, we inform targeted public health communication strategies. Examining vaccine uptake in rural India, we use Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) to interpret deviations, capturing personal experiences and biases. Through the COM-B model and 25 interviews, we uncover motivations influenced by individual, family, and community factors. Synthesizing findings, we propose tailored public health communication grounded in behavioral psychology. Rather than disregarding biases, we explore their implications for effective interventions. This research advances health communication, particularly benefiting lower-middle-income countries with non-pharmacological approaches.

Healthcare Professionals' Emotions of Distance and Connection When Dealing With Patients' Vaccine Hesitancy: Interaction Styles, Values, and Implications

Healthcare professionals (HCPs) play a primary role in the delivery of population-based vaccination programs. Their emotional well-being can influence the quality of their relationships with patients and generally the outcome of their consultations. This qualitative study sought to identify the types of emotions that HCPs feel during conversations with vaccine-hesitant patients and their styles of interaction. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between June and November 2022 with 41 HCPs (mainly general practitioners and nurses) responsible for vaccinating patients: 23 in England and 18 in France. Framework analysis showed that participants reported numerous emotions, some associated with connection to patients (such as self-confidence and satisfaction) and others with distance (including anger, frustration, unease, and exhaustion). We identified four clusters of emotions reported together when reflecting on interactions with vaccine-hesitant patients: "self-confidence and emotional empathy" (satisfaction, sadness regarding the patient's situation); "anxiety and insecurity" (doubts about skills, concern for the patients); "exhaustion and weariness" (feeling of incompetence, nervousness); and "discredit and frustration" (feeling discredited, anger). Three styles of interaction were identified: most HCPs reassured and encouraged patients to get vaccinated ("patient-centered" style), some sought to convince them ("adamant" style), and some to inform them without discussion ("detached" style). In our study, HCPs describing a patient-centered interaction style emphasized emotions of connection more than of distance in their discourse, in contrast to those describing an adamant or detached style. Our results suggest that training programs offered to HCPs involved in vaccination discussions should consider the importance of emotions associated with vaccine discussions.

Communication Strategies to Promote COVID-19 Vaccination Intention: How Effective are Source, Appeal, Framing, and Evidence Type Approaches?

This systematic review analyzed the effectiveness of key persuasive strategies - source, appeal, framing, and evidence (SAFE) - on COVID-19 vaccination intention. Quantitative studies were searched in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed following the PRISMA guidelines. From the 61 studies that met inclusion criteria, source and framing are the most commonly applied SAFE strategies. However, source characteristics are a more consistent influence on vaccine intentions than message framing strategies, with expert sources and general practitioners emerging as the key sources contributing to greater vaccine intentions. In addition, a range of mediators and moderators influence the process through which SAFE message strategies impact vaccine intentions. Framing effects, in particular, are moderated by political identity, source characteristics, and vaccine perceptions. Tests of mediating processes highlight how health behavior judgments (e.g. perceived vaccine benefits, risks, trust in vaccination, perceived severity) and message response/perceptions (e.g. counterarguing, perceived similarity/empathy) operate as key intervening factors between SAFE message strategies and vaccine intentions. Overall, when practitioners apply various structural approaches (narrative elements, fear appeals, framing cues) to vaccine promotion campaigns, they should be cognizant of who is providing that appeal. Targeted populations may benefit most from different structural elements if they are integrated with sources that resonate with the audience.

Exploring the ethics of using fictional stories for health education on social media to share information and emotions about the HPV vaccine: A cross-sectional study with interdisciplinary health experts

Social media is used to promote the HPV vaccine through various strategies, including the use of stories and narratives. Understanding the ethical concerns related to the use of social media in this capacity are important. The purpose of this study is to identify ethical concerns of using fictional stories to share information and emotions about the HPV vaccine on social media, ultimately to influence parents on their decision to vaccinate their child.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey with researchers in the fields of health communication, cancer prevention, social media, and public health ethics from October to December 2021. Respondents were presented with a fictional story that consisted of seven connected vignettes about the HPV vaccine. For each vignette, respondents were asked to rate the potential benefits and risk, as well as the potential for ethical concerns of using the fictional narrative style to share information about the HPV vaccine. Descriptive statistics summarized responses, and qualitative data were analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

On average, respondents (n = 41) perceived more benefits than risks when it comes to 1) using social media for health education generally and 2) using a story with connected vignettes for vaccine communication. The vignettes prioritizing vaccine hesitancy, positive emotion, and health equity were seen as having the most potential benefit, while the vignettes highlighting vaccine confidence and skepticism were seen as having the most potential risk. Overall, respondents felt there were several ethical concerns of note - persuasion was the most common (15 % of respondents) followed by deception (9 %) and manipulation (8 %). Qualitative data highlighted the importance of transparency and trust to avoid ethical violations and negative outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Ethical concerns exist when using fictional stories to share health information on social media, particularly as new online technologies make it harder to tell fact from fiction. Practical and actionable recommendations for researchers must be developed, defining a range of ethical responsibilities.

Factors Influencing Adolescent COVID-19 Vaccination During the Omicron Surge

While most adolescents experience mild-COVID-19 infection, those with underlying medical conditions have an increased risk of severe health outcomes. Furthermore, compared with other pediatric populations, adolescents have experienced higher rates of COVID-19-associated hospitalization. COVID-19 vaccine decision-making in adolescents during COVID-19 surges is not well understood. Our objective was to explore factors influencing parental and adolescents' COVID-19 vaccine decision-making during the Omicron winter 2021/2022 surge. Participants were recruited from an academic pediatric primary care clinic. Eligible adolescents (aged 12-17 years) who received their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine between December 2021 and February 2022 were recruited to participate in a semistructured interview with their parent. Perspectives were illuminated through thematic analysis of the data that included coding and pattern identification. Ten parent-adolescent dyads' interview data were analyzed and classified into three principal themes influencing vaccine acceptance during the Omicron surge: perceived risk of COVID-19 infection, family member influence, and clear, two-way communication with a clinician. Despite widespread COVID-19 vaccine availability for adolescents, vaccination rates remain suboptimal even during times of increased disease prevalence. Using health promotion practices to emphasize perceived risk of infection while navigating family dynamics through two-way communication during COVID-19 surges may support vaccine uptake.

Evaluating the Impact of the "We Can Do This" Campaign's Heavy-Up Advertising on Initial COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake

To address vaccine hesitancy, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) launched the "We Can Do This" COVID-19 public education campaign (the Campaign) in 2021 to promote vaccine confidence and increase vaccine uptake. The Campaign introduced a heavy-up media strategy to enhance its reach and engagement with its vaccine hesitant audience. This approach complemented the Campaign's national media strategy while delivering an additional advertising dose to select priority designated market areas (DMAs) - that is, media markets - each month. We examine the relationship between the Campaign's heavy-up strategy and initial COVID-19 vaccine uptake from August to December 2021. A stacked difference-in-differences (DID) analysis compared initial COVID-19 vaccine uptake between DMAs that received heavy-up (treatment) and DMAs that did not (control). The Campaign's short-term heavy-up advertising strategy was associated with increased initial vaccine uptake in treatment DMAs. These results provide valuable insights for public health campaign strategy and evaluation, highlighting the effectiveness of increasing campaign dose in select markets to address vaccine hesitancy and improve public health outcomes.

A thematic analysis of UK COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy discussions on Twitter

BACKGROUND

Following UK approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines on 2/12/20 and 30/12/20 respectively, discussions about them emerged on the social media platform Twitter, (now 'X'). Previous research has shown that Twitter/ X is used by the UK public to engage with public health announcements and that social media influences public opinions of vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccines, globally. This study explored discussions on Twitter posted in response to the UK government's posts introducing the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines. The aim was to investigate vaccine hesitant views, and thereby identify barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK.

METHODS

Online ethnography was used to collect responses ('tweet replies') to 14 Twitter posts published by officials or departments of the UK government on the dates the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines received approval from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (2/12/20 and 30/12/20, respectively). 16,508 responses were collected and those expressing vaccine hesitancy were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three themes that underpinned Twitter posters' vaccine hesitancy were identified: (1) Concerns about vaccine development and safety, (2) Information, misinformation and disinformation, (3) Distrust: Politics and 'Big Pharma'. From these themes, eight barriers and eight facilitators to UK COVID-19 vaccine uptake were identified.

CONCLUSION

This paper highlights key obstacles to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in the UK based on views from Twitter and contributes to the emerging literature on the relationship between social media and the public response to COVID-19 vaccines. In so doing, this analysis offers insights that are useful for the development of vaccine communication strategies more broadly, both in and beyond future pandemics, to ensure that public concerns are addressed, and misinformation and disinformation are appropriately countered.

Vaccine hesitancy among health paraprofessionals: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines vaccine hesitancy as "a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite availability of vaccination services". Vaccine hesitancy has also been declared a top threat to global health. Some employers imposed vaccine mandates during the Covid-19 pandemic resulting in health care employees resigning or being fired rather than receive a vaccine. Healthcare paraprofessionals such as certified nursing assistants, dietary and home health aides are among the most patient facing of all health care providers. Their beliefs and attitudes about vaccines are critical to how they communicate about vaccines with their patients.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this project was to survey health care paraprofessionals to explore their thoughts and opinions about vaccines in general, and Covid-19 vaccines specifically.

METHODS

This was a 25 question, mixed methods, cross sectional email survey. Subjects were recruited from the mailing list of a non-profit organization in the Midwest. This organization is dedicated to bringing a face and a voice to healthcare paraprofessionals engaged in direct patient care.

RESULTS

Most respondents were reasonably well informed about vaccines; had received one or more doses of indicated vaccines; used credible resources to learn about vaccines and believed physicians and pharmacists were the most trusted information sources. Qualitative results indicated that respondents expressed support for vaccines but that the support was often qualified in that a respondent may have had both pro and anti-vaccine opinions in the same response. They also expressed that communications about vaccines were often problematic. Additional vaccine-related continuing professional development for healthcare paraprofessionals appears to be indicated.

CONCLUSIONS

Although attitudes towards vaccines were generally positive, respondents had concerns about the quality of vaccine information. Additional vaccine-related continuing professional development for healthcare paraprofessionals appears to be indicated.

Examining psychological correlates of vaccine hesitancy: a comparative study between the US and Israel

It is important to identify psychological correlates of vaccine hesitancy, including among people not from the United States (U.S.). College students were recruited between March-June 2023 in the US (n = 330, M age = 20.21, 79.5% female) and in Israel (n = 204, M age = 23.45, 92.6% female) to complete a cross-sectional survey on vaccine attitudes, emotions, and behavior. A 2 (Nation: US, Israel) × 2 (Vaccine Status: Vaccinated, Unvaccinated) factorial design was used. Individual ANCOVAS controlling for sociodemographic factors were conducted to test main effects of nation and vaccine status, and their interaction, across various psychological correlates of health behavior. Consistent with hypotheses, unvaccinated (vs. vaccinated) individuals reported higher perceived ambiguity, reactance, and anger as well as perceived lower susceptibility, severity, worry, positive emotion, and intentions to vaccinate. Contrary to hypotheses, unvaccinated individuals reported greater fear. Israeli (vs. American) participants reported higher perceived ambiguity, worry, fear, and anger, as well as lower perceived susceptibility. Vaccinated Americans reported higher intentions to vaccinate again in the future (M = 2.89, SE = 0.08) compared to vaccinated Israelis (M = 2.36, SE = 0.08). However, unvaccinated Americans reported lower intentions to vaccinate (M = 1.80, SE = 0.15) than unvaccinated Israelis (M = 1.95, SE = 0.21). Findings provide insight into correlates to target for vaccine promotion and emphasize the need for cultural tailoring.

The evolution of vaccine hesitancy through the COVID-19 pandemic: A semi-structured interview study on booster and bivalent doses

We sought in-depth understanding on the evolution of factors influencing COVID-19 booster dose and bivalent vaccine hesitancy in a longitudinal semi-structured interview-based qualitative study. Serial interviews were conducted between July 25th and September 1st, 2022 (Phase I: univalent booster dose availability), and between November 21st, 2022 and January 11th, 2023 (Phase II: bivalent vaccine availability). Adults (≥18 years) in Canada who had received an initial primary series and had not received a COVID-19 booster dose were eligible for Phase I, and subsequently invited to participate in Phase II. Twenty-two of twenty-three (96%) participants completed interviews for both phases (45 interviews). Nearly half of participants identified as a woman (n = 11), the median age was 37 years (interquartile range: 32-48), and most participants were employed full-time (n = 12); no participant reported needing to vaccinate (with a primary series) for their workplace. No participant reported having received a COVID-19 booster dose at the time of their interview in Phase II. Three themes relating to the development of hesitancy toward continued vaccination against COVID-19 were identified: 1) effectiveness (frequency concerns; infection despite vaccination); 2) necessity (less threatening, low urgency, alternate protective measures); and 3) information (need for data, contradiction and confusion, lack of trust, decreased motivation). The data from interviews with individuals who had not received a COVID-19 booster dose or bivalent vaccine despite having received a primary series of COVID-19 vaccines highlights actionable targets to address vaccine hesitancy and improve public health literacy.

Exploring the Cognitive, Affective, and Conative Factors of Bystander Intervention to Improve Protective Measures During Health Emergencies

This study examines the factors shaping individuals' reactions to health-protective norm violations through the lens of cognitive accessibility, the risk-as-feelings hypothesis, and the tripartite decision-making framework. By surveying 1,426 U.S. college students, we found that frequent exposure to health information in the media is associated with an increased tendency to adopt health-protective measures and support bystander intervention (upstanding) intentions. From a theoretical perspective, the results underscore the significant impact of the conative (behavioral) dimension on bystander intervention intention, alongside contributions from the affective and cognitive dimensions. Health communication practitioners should plan frequency-enhancing media strategies to effectively reach their target audience. Well-targeted and repeated exposure to vaccine information may help address health norm violations by correcting deviant behaviors.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination or intent to be vaccinated across three U.S. states

OBJECTIVES

Vaccine hesitancy represents an important challenge to the effective control of the COVID-19 pandemic. In prior research on seasonal influenza, childhood vaccination, and emergency vaccination programs, hesitancy has been associated with a wide range of demographic, psychological, and compliance factors.

METHODS

In January 2021, an online survey was distributed using the Qualtrics (Provo, UT) platform to a proportional quota sample of individuals in three states: Louisiana, New York, and Washington. Crude and adjusted risk differences and 95 % confidence intervals were calculated to describe the relationship between vaccination or intent to be vaccinated and demographic, psychological, compliance, and pandemic impact variables.

RESULTS

Of 812 respondents, 696 indicated their vaccination status or intent to be vaccinated. Sixty-six percent indicated they were vaccinated or intended to be when available (n = 457) and 34 % were not vaccinated and did not intend to be vaccinated (n = 239). In bivariate analysis, respondents who were older, male, married, white, and reported higher household incomes were more likely to be vaccinated or intend to be. Those who complied with mask wearing, social distancing, and avoided gatherings with people outside their household were also more likely to report vaccination or intention. In the multivariable model, backward elimination resulted in a model that retained sex, race, household income, and avoiding large gatherings.

CONCLUSION

There are important demographic, behavioral, and other factors that influence vaccine acceptance. Identifying those factors is vital for targeted and effective messaging, education, and engagement to reach those most hesitant, increase vaccination coverage, and effectively address the COVID-19 pandemic.

Targeting COVID-19 vaccine-hesitancy in college students: An audience-centered approach

Objective: The study tested potential factors that differentiated the COVID-19 vaccine-hesitant and -inclined college students and, based on these factors, identified subgroups of the vaccine-hesitant students. Participants: Participants were 1,183 U.S. college students attending four-year universities or community colleges recruited through Qualtrics between January 25 and March 3, 2021. Methods: Participants completed an online survey assessing their COVID-19 vaccination intention, perceived risks of COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccines, efficacy beliefs regarding COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccines, and emotions toward taking the COVID-19 vaccines. Results: Vaccine-hesitant and -inclined college students varied in their emotions, risk perceptions, and efficacy beliefs regarding the virus and the vaccines. Using these factors as indicators, vaccine-hesitant college students were classified into five latent subgroups with distinct characteristics. Conclusions: In identifying subgroups of the vaccine-hesitant college students, the study has important insights to offer regarding the design of vaccine-promotion messaging strategies targeting the college student population.

Are health protective behaviors promoted by anticipated regret?

Several factors influence the adoption of health-protective behaviors, including anticipatory affective reactions like regret. The ability to anticipate regret matures with age, allowing individuals to make increasingly risk-averse decisions. This study examined the relationship between age and the adoption of health-protective behaviors to limit the spread of a virus from adolescence to adulthood, and the mediating effect of anticipated regret. A total of 410 French participants, aged 14-58, reported their compliance with health-protective behaviors (e.g., using surgical masks, handwashing, social distancing), along with their anticipated regret in the event of non-adherence to such behaviors leading to the contamination of themselves or others. The findings revealed that both the adoption of these behaviors and anticipated regret increased with age. Moreover, anticipated regret mediated the effect of age on health-protective behavior, encouraging higher compliance with preventive measures and reducing risk-taking.

Toward Multidimensional Message Tailoring to Address COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccine-Hesitancy: A Latent Profile Analysis Approach

Vaccines remain the best strategy as the COVID-19 pandemic enters into later stages and governments begin to shed pandemic-control measures. Vaccine hesitancy continues to be a major obstacle in efforts to end the pandemic. This study reports formative evaluation research that adopted a multidimensional approach using latent profile analysis to audience segmentation and message targeting. Within the framework of the integrated behavioral model, data were collected from a US national survey to explore the dimensions in which vaccine-confident vs. -hesitant individuals differed significantly across the topics of COVID-19 and influenza. Latent profile analyses were performed to identify subgroups and establish measurement invariance between COVID-19 and influenza vaccines. Matching message strategies were proposed for the distinctive characteristics of the subgroups for both topics and to be tested in future research.

Fun with Frustration? TikTok Influencers' Emotional Expression Predicts User Engagement with COVID-19 Vaccination Messages

This study examined what kinds of TikTok video and message features are associated with user engagement in the context of COVID-19 vaccination. Content analysis was applied to study a sample of 223 COVID-19 vaccination-related videos from creators with at least 10,000 followers. The content analysis involved coding themes, video formats, the valence of attitude toward vaccination, and emotional expressions from the influencers. A majority of videos showcased personal vaccination experiences, followed by fictitious dramas and instructional information. More fictitious dramas expressed unclear attitudes, neither explicitly supporting nor opposing the COVID-19 vaccine, compared to personal vaccination stories and instructional videos. Some imaginative and dramatic scenes, such as zombie transformation or dramatic spasms after taking the vaccines, were widely imitated across influencers, perhaps humorously, and raised concerns about diminishing positive images of vaccine uptake. Videos with simultaneous expression of humor and frustration significantly predicted engagement when the video content opposed or was uncertain about taking the vaccine, implying the effectiveness of mixed emotional attributes within a message. This study provides insight into how social context and message choices by creators interact to influence audience engagement.

COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancies: A Spanish-Language Focus Group Analysis in Texas

COVID-19 related health disparities are prevalent among higher risk populations like the Hispanic community. Vaccination is one readily available public health tool, yet vaccine uptake is lower among minority populations and hesitations and concerns are high. In the present study, interpersonal and media sources of information about COVID-19 were discussed in a series of six focus groups with Spanish-language dominant and bilingual English-Spanish respondents in a large metropolitan area in Texas. Participants reported using legacy media as a main source of information about COVID-19 vaccines and encountered conspiracy theories and misinformation on social media. Using the Health Belief Model as the theoretical lens, we found individuals' and family members' perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 played a part in participants wanting to find and get the vaccine. Provider recommendations may have served as cues to action. Ease of receiving the vaccines at church and pharmacies may have served to boost participants self-efficacy. Perceived barriers include vaccine specific reasons such as the fast pace of initial authorization, side effects, and long-term effects along with conspiracy theories. Prevailing information gaps regarding the COVID-19 vaccines and the resulting uncertainty are discussed. Understanding information sources and the trust Hispanic communities place in these sources is important in designing effective health messages.

Examination of public perceptions of microbes and microbiomes in the United States reveals insights for science communication

Within a changing research and media landscape, misconceptions and misinformation about microorganisms and microbiomes can arise, necessitating improvements in science communication practices through insights in public perceptions of the microbial world. Yet, little is known about public perceptions of microorganisms and microbiomes, making it difficult to develop tailored messaging. Here we perform an inductive thematic analysis with interviews and surveys from thirty adults across the United States to identify key factors to enhance microbial science communication efforts. Together, our results underscore the importance of 1) recognizing the existing and desired future knowledge of an audience, 2) aligning with broader socio-scientific issues that resonate with people in relevant channels using social networks, 3) fostering collaboration between microbiologists, social scientists, and communicators to improve messaging, and 4) appealing to people's values and emotions to establish meaningful connections. This study concludes that non-microbial interests, such as an interest in health and wellness, may lead to acquisition of microbial knowledge and that people want scientists to share microbial messages preferably on platforms like social media. Additionally, we identified confusion about microbial terms and a desire to understand human-centric benefits of microorganisms and microbiomes. We suggest that microbiologists partner with science communicators to develop microbial messaging, capitalizing on connections to non-microbial interests and appealing to people's microbial worldview.

'Is It Safe? Is it not?' A Youth-Led Photovoice Study of Youth Perspectives of COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence

BACKGROUND

Youth have been uniquely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite high rates of COVID-19 infection, youth had one of the lowest vaccine uptake rates. Certain characteristics can affect vaccine uptake, such as mental health and substance use, but it is important to understand uptake for an effective response to pandemics.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the perspectives of youth with mental health or substance use concerns on COVID-19 vaccine confidence, hesitancy and overall COVID-19 vaccine perspectives.

METHODS

Using photovoice, a community-based participatory research method, a sample of 27 youth aged 14-24 years participated in a series of photography workshops and focus groups. Participants submitted final photographs for discussion. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Four themes were generated: (1) Youth deciphered the vaccine discourse in a changing information landscape; (2) mixed perspectives of families, friends and loved ones influenced the vaccine journey; (3) complex societal influences affected views and decisions around the COVID-19 vaccine; and (4) youth navigated their vaccine journeys through first- and second-hand experiences. The four themes and subthemes highlight the evolution of youth's journeys with the COVID-19 vaccine over the course of the pandemic and into the late-pandemic period.

CONCLUSIONS

Youth with mental health or substance use challenges navigated a complex environment during the COVID-19 pandemic. The wide variety of factors influencing vaccine perspectives should be taken into account in public health messaging and future research on youth vaccine uptake. Youth-led and youth-engaged research can help solicit rich and meaningful perspectives of young people on important public health issues.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This was a youth-led study. A youth research analyst conducted the study activities together with the support of a youth advisory group, an adult photographer with lived experience, and a scientific team.

Examining the association of vaccine-related mindsets and post-vaccination antibody response, side effects, and affective outcomes

Background

Although vaccines are largely effective and safe, there is variability in post-vaccination experience regarding antibody response, side effects, and affective outcomes. Vaccine mindsets, specific beliefs about the vaccine, may be associated with post-vaccination experience. This is important since mindsets are malleable and may help decrease vaccine hesitancy and improve post-vaccination experience.

Methods

In a prospective study, we measured overall positive vaccine mindset and specific mindsets regarding efficacy, body response, and side effects. We tested whether vaccine mindsets before vaccination predicted neutralizing antibody response, side effects, vaccine-related stress, and affective outcomes (general stress, sadness, and happiness). Antibody response was assessed one month and six months after participants completed a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination series. Side effect experience and affective reactions were assessed daily on the vaccination day and the subsequent five days.

Results

There was no significant association between the aggregate vaccine mindset score and neutralizing antibody response; however, people with a more positive vaccine mindset reported fewer side effects, less same-day vaccine-related anxiety, and improved affective outcomes after vaccination. In secondary analyses, when specific mindsets were explored, the mindset that vaccine side effects are a sign of treatment efficacy predicted higher antibodies, but not side effects experience and vaccine-related anxiety. Vaccine efficacy and body-response mindsets predicted fewer side effects, vaccine-related anxiety, and improved affective outcomes after vaccination.

Conclusion

These findings underscore the potential of vaccine mindsets in enhancing the overall post-vaccination experience and, in some cases, increasing antibody response.

The Planned Risk Information Seeking Model Applied to Vaccine Information Avoidance and the Role of Affect, Emotion and Perceived Benefits

Using a stratified sample of German residents (N = 1,508), we examined intentions to avoid information about vaccination against COVID-19. The study was guided by the planned risk information seeking model (PRISM), also taking into consideration benefit perceptions, positive affective responses, and discrete emotions. Our findings generally supported the utility of the extended PRISM to predict information avoidance intentions; most of the hypothesized relationships were supported and the model accounted for 58.8% of the variance in intentions to avoid information about COVID-19 vaccination. Furthermore, perceived benefits of vaccination, and positive affect felt toward vaccination played significant roles in explaining intentions to avoid information about vaccination. A more nuanced view on affective predictors showed that hope and interest were weakly associated with less pronounced avoidance intent, whereas we found no link between avoidance intent and fear, anxiety, and anger.

Dissonance between posts of health agencies and public comments regarding COVID-19 and vaccination on Facebook in Northern California

BACKGROUND

Public health crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, have prompted a need for health agencies to improve their disease preparedness strategies, informing their communities of new information and promoting preventive behaviors to help curb the spread of the virus.

METHODS

We ran unsupervised machine learning and emotion analysis, validated with manual coding, on posts of health agencies (N = 1588) and their associated public comments (N = 7813) during a crucial initial period of the COVID-19 pandemic (January 2020 to February 2021) among nine different counties with a higher proportion of vaccine-hesitant communities in Northern California. In addition, we explored differences in concerns and expressed emotions by two key group-level factors, county-level COVID-19 death rate and political party affiliation.

RESULTS

We consistently find that while health agencies primarily disseminated information about COVID-19 and the vaccine, they failed to address the concerns of their communities as expressed in public comment sections. Topics among public audiences focused on concerns with the COVID-19 vaccine safety and rollout, state mandates, flu vaccination, and frustration with politicians, and they expressed more positive and more negative emotions than health agencies. Further, there were several differences in primary topics and emotions expressed among public audiences by county-level COVID-19 death rate and political party affiliation.

CONCLUSION

While this research serves as a case study, findings indicate how local health agencies, and their audiences, discuss their perceptions and concerns regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and may inform health communication researchers and practitioners on how to prepare and manage for emerging health crises.

COVID-19 Vaccine Information Exposure: The Effect of Online Authority vs. Non-Authority Sources on Beliefs, Emotions and Information Engagement Behaviors

Background/Objectives: Limited research has examined the theoretical linkages between exposure to COVID-19 vaccine information sources, vaccination-related beliefs, vaccination-induced emotions, and vaccine information engagement. Methods: An online survey was conducted with a national sample of adults (N = 630) residing in the U.S. to test these relationships, guided by the Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) framework and the Health Belief Model. Results: Study findings showed that exposure to online authority vaccine information sources was positively related to vaccination-benefit beliefs and negatively related to vaccination-barrier beliefs, in addition to hopeful feelings connected to vaccination. Exposure to non-authority sources was positively associated with vaccination-barrier beliefs, hopeful and fearful feelings connected to vaccination, and vaccine information engagement. While vaccination-benefit beliefs and vaccination-barrier beliefs were negatively and positively linked to vaccine information engagement, respectively, these beliefs were each positively connected to hopeful feelings and fearful feelings toward vaccination in that order. Both hopeful and fearful feelings toward vaccination also emerged as positive correlates of vaccine information engagement. Conclusions: This study contributes to our understanding of how cognitive appraisals of and affective responses to risk information disseminated by different types of sources may be related to risk information engagement behavior in a public health crisis. Results bring evidence-based insights to both researchers and health professionals to better equip them to counter vaccine misinformation and reduce vaccination barriers.

Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication and Emotional Appeals in COVID-19 Public Health Messaging: Quantitative Content Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although COVID-19 is no longer a global health emergency, it remains pervasive in Singapore, a city-state situated in Southeast Asia, with periodic waves of infection. In addition to disease management, strong communication strategies are critical in the government's response to the pandemic to keep the public updated and equip them in protecting themselves.

OBJECTIVE

Grounded in the crisis and emergency risk communication (CERC) framework and emotional appeals, this study aimed to analyze public health communication strategies in Singapore during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Quantitative content analysis was conducted on 696 Facebook (Meta Platforms Inc) posts and 83 website articles published by Singapore-based public health institutions between January 2020 and September 2022.

RESULTS

The results showed that increasing communication on message themes, such as inquisitive messaging and clarification, can enhance communication strategies. The use of emotional appeals also varies with time and should be carefully used as they are context-specific.

CONCLUSIONS

Theoretically, this study contributes to advancements in the CERC framework and concepts of emotional appeals by exploring the applications and changes of CERC message types and emotional appeals at different phases. The findings can provide practical guidance for authorities and communication practitioners in developing effective communication strategies.

Comparative Study of COVID-19 Vaccination Frequency Between Chronic Psychiatric Patients and the General Population

Background: COVID-19 vaccination rates among individuals with mental illness have raised concerns due to these individuals' increased vulnerability to infection and complications. Objectives: This study aimed to compare the frequency of COVID-19 vaccination between individuals with chronic psychiatric conditions and the general population. Methods: A descriptive-analytical study was conducted, including patients with psychiatric disorders and a comparison group without psychiatric problems. Data were collected between May 2023 and August 2023 using a simple random sampling method. Participants were diagnosed with psychiatric disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and completed a questionnaire. Results: In a study of 137 participants, including 67 healthy individuals, 38 with schizophrenia, and 32 with affective disorders, psychiatric patients had lower full vaccination rates (P < 0.001). Patients with schizophrenia received fewer doses than healthy individuals and those with affective disorders (coefficient = -0.54, P = 0.007). Even after adjusting for demographics, the relationship between schizophrenia and vaccination rates remained significant. Conclusions: Chronic psychiatric patients have lower COVID-19 vaccination rates compared to the general population. Targeted vaccination programs and improved access to psychiatric healthcare facilities are crucial for addressing the pandemic's disproportionate impact on this vulnerable group.

Vaccine Hesitancy at Nine Community Sites Across the United States, Early in COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy has been a significant concern throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccine hesitancy can be attributed to lack of confidence in vaccines, complacency about the health threat, or lack of convenience of vaccination. To date, few studies have used methods designed to include populations underrepresented in research when identifying factors associated with vaccine hesitancy.

METHODS

Between January and July 2021, potential participants were recruited from community venues selected through time-location sampling in 15 defined communities in the United States. Study staff administered a questionnaire on demographics, COVID-19 behaviors and attitudes, and vaccination status or intention to consenting individuals. Vaccine hesitancy was analyzed among those age 18 years and older from nine of the 15 sites and was defined as self-reported neutral, unlikely, or very unlikely vaccine intention. Logistic regression modeling, adjusted for site, identified factors associated with vaccine hesitancy.

RESULTS

Among 11,559 individuals, vaccine hesitancy by site ranged from 8.7 to 31.1%. Vaccine hesitancy was associated with being Black compared to White, being White compared to Asian, younger age, unstable housing, being unemployed, lower income, having a disability, providing care in home, not reporting inability to visit sick or elderly relatives during the pandemic, not reporting increased anxiety during the pandemic, and not spending more time with loved ones during the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

In these selected US communities, early in vaccine rollout, there were significant racial disparities in vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, individuals who were more marginalized due to their socioeconomic status were more likely to report vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine campaigns should make efforts to remove barriers to vaccination, by improving convenience.

Fighting Fire or Fighting War: Examining the Framing Effects of COVID-19 Metaphors

Metaphorical language describing the COVID-19 pandemic as a war has been pervasive in public discourse (e.g. "the pandemic is a war," "the virus is an enemy," and "the vaccine is a weapon"). This study employs an online survey experiment (N = 551 U.S. adults) to examine the impact of war metaphors compared to non-metaphorical literal frames and fire metaphors (e.g. "the pandemic is a wildfire"). War metaphors exhibited little advantage over literal frames across a variety of desirable outcomes (i.e. the adoption of pro-health behaviors against COVID-19, perceived solidarity and collective responsibility to curb the pandemic, and intentions to discuss and share the health news with others). However, this study revealed some benefits of war metaphors over fire metaphors. Compared with fire metaphors, health news featuring war metaphors increased both positive emotions and perceived threats of COVID-19, which in turn promoted pro-health behaviors against COVID-19 and perceived solidarity to cope with the public health crisis. Moreover, positive emotions in response to war metaphors also indirectly encouraged the retransmission of science-based COVID-19 health news. This study thus showcased the benefits and limitations of war metaphors and revealed the mediating roles of perceived threats and positive emotions in explaining war metaphorical framing effects. Implications of using war and fire metaphors for communicating about public health crises are also discussed.

Mandating COVID-19 Vaccination on Campus: A Qualitative Analysis of a Cross-Sectional Study of California College Students

The purpose of this study was to examine college student perceptions related to institutional vaccine mandates. We utilized qualitative data (n = 2,212) from five open-ended questions in a cross-sectional study of students enrolled or intending to enroll in an institute of higher education in California in fall 2021. Data were collected between June and August 2021. Thematic analysis was employed to analyze student beliefs, and four themes were developed from the data: (1) Polarizing views and language, (2) deciding who to trust, (3) conveying rights and risk, and (4) staying focused on education. The themes represented vaccinated and nonvaccinated student perspectives, capturing views about trust, rights, and risk. Many responses were polarizing and included language that was emotional and political. Despite the range of responses, most students expressed appreciation and approval of the vaccination mandate on college campuses. Findings illustrate the important contributions of qualitative research and suggest opportunities for public health practitioners to lead and engage in critical dialogue about science and public health practices as we aim to promote public perceptions of vaccination programs and health promotion practice.

Links between Vaccination Fear-, Anxiety-, Alexithymia-, and Type D Personality-Related Vaccination Decisions: A Network Analysis in a Multicultural Sample

This study examines the links between vaccination status, fear of vaccination (cognitive and somatic symptoms), anxiety, alexithymia, and type D personality (negative affect and social inhibition), to propose policies to increase vaccination rates. A sample of university students (n = 2535; mean age = 20.59, SD = 2.04; male: 26.75%, female: 73.25%) from Spain, Italy, Lebanon, Nigeria, Turkey, and Ukraine completed the Vaccination Fear Scale (VFS-6), the Generalised Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), the Perth Alexithymia Questionnaire-Short Form (PAQ-S), the Type D Scale (DS14), and also a question on vaccination status. Correlation, regression, and network analyses were applied. Cognitive symptoms of fear of vaccination and negative affect were the most significant in the correlation and regression analyses. In the network analysis, negative affect showed the highest values in all centrality indices and positive relationships with other nodes. Vaccination status showed negative relationships with fear of vaccination, alexithymia, and social inhibition. The network structure is similar between the sexes but varies between cultures and sexes within cultures. The relationship between vaccination status and cognitive symptoms of fear of vaccination was the most consistent, allowing for interventions at this level to be advised across cultures. For more specific interventions, cultural context must be considered for optimal results.

Creating a Culturally Safe Online Data Collection Instrument to Measure Vaccine Confidence Among Indigenous Youth: Indigenous Consensus Method

BACKGROUND

 Participating in surveys can shape the perception of participants related to the study topic. Administering a vaccine hesitancy questionnaire can have negative impacts on participants' vaccine confidence. This is particularly true for online and cross-cultural data collection because culturally safe health education to correct misinformation is typically not provided after the administration of an electronic survey.

OBJECTIVE

 To create a culturally safe, online, COVID-19 vaccine confidence survey for Indigenous youth designed to collect authentic, culturally relevant data of their vaccine experiences, with a low risk of contributing to further vaccine confusion among participants.

METHODS

 Using the Aboriginal Telehealth Knowledge Circle consensus method, a team of academics, health care providers, policy makers, and community partners reviewed COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy surveys used in public health research, analyzed potential risks, and created a framework for electronic Indigenous vaccine confidence surveys as well as survey items.

RESULTS

 The framework for safer online survey items is based on 2 principles, a first do-no-harm approach and applying a strengths-based lens. Relevant survey domains identified in the process include sociodemographic information, participants' connection to their community, preferred sources for health information, vaccination uptake among family members and peers, as well as personal attitudes toward vaccines. A total of 44 survey items were developed, including 5 open-ended items to improve the authenticity of the data and the analysis of the experiences of Indigenous youth.

CONCLUSIONS

 Using an Indigenous consensus method, we have developed an online COVID-19 vaccine confidence survey with culturally relevant domains and reduced the risk of amplifying misinformation and negative impacts on vaccine confidence among Indigenous participants. Our approach can be adapted to other online survey development in collaboration with Indigenous communities.

Measuring vaccination coverage and concerns of vaccine holdouts from web search logs

To design effective vaccine policies, policymakers need detailed data about who has been vaccinated, who is holding out, and why. However, existing data in the US are insufficient: reported vaccination rates are often delayed or not granular enough, and surveys of vaccine hesitancy are limited by high-level questions and self-report biases. Here we show how search engine logs and machine learning can help to fill these gaps, using anonymized Bing data from February to August 2021. First, we develop a vaccine intent classifier that accurately detects when a user is seeking the COVID-19 vaccine on Bing. Our classifier demonstrates strong agreement with CDC vaccination rates, while preceding CDC reporting by 1-2 weeks, and estimates more granular ZIP-level rates, revealing local heterogeneity in vaccine seeking. To study vaccine hesitancy, we use our classifier to identify two groups, vaccine early adopters and vaccine holdouts. We find that holdouts, compared to early adopters matched on covariates, are 67% likelier to click on untrusted news sites, and are much more concerned about vaccine requirements, development, and vaccine myths. Even within holdouts, clusters emerge with different concerns and openness to the vaccine. Finally, we explore the temporal dynamics of vaccine concerns and vaccine seeking, and find that key indicators predict when individuals convert from holding out to seeking the vaccine.

Integrating Science Media Literacy, Motivational Interviewing, and Neuromarketing Science to Increase Vaccine Education Confidence among U.S. Extension Professionals

This article presents an Integrative Model of Sustainable Health Decision-Making and a toolkit to equip U.S. Extension professionals with knowledge and skills to engage in adult immunization education. The objective was to reduce mistrust and increase willingness and confidence toward delivering vaccination education. The model was developed through an explanatory parallel mixed methods design. Data collection included a needs assessment survey, interviews, workshops, and Neuromarketing message testing. The resulting toolkit was pilot tested before final delivery. Four key needs were identified: tailoring trainings based on Extension roles, prioritizing preserving community trust and professional credibility, establishing connections with medical experts, and strengthening Science Media Literacy skills to counter misinformation and communicate emerging science. Correlations among constructs supported an integrated model focused on a professional development core of Science Media Literacy, Motivational Interviewing, and Neuromarketing Science that strengthens communication relationships between priority populations and trusted partners. The model and work described in this article can serve as a general framework for engaging key influencers in communities in communication education intended to promote sustainable well-being, such as increasing vaccine uptake.

The role of mental well-being in the effects of persuasive health messages: A scoping review

Emerging evidence in health communication and psychology suggests that a) exposure to specific persuasive health messages can have unintended effects on the mental well-being of recipients and b) recipients' mental well-being before exposure can influence message processing. Available evidence regarding the relationship between mental well-being and exposure to specific health messages lacks consistency and is scattered across different fields. This scoping review of 24 publications summarizes what is known about mental health effects in health communication and provides a research agenda for future work. Among others, key findings suggest that particularly negative emotional appeals may have broad, negative effects on indicators of hedonic well-being. Further, humor and gain appeals may positively impact mental well-being, although positive message features are strongly understudied in this space. Lower mental well-being prior to message exposure may impact message processing, but not necessarily message effectiveness. We find that potential well-being effects of health communication have been largely ignored, especially outside the realm of mental health research. Yet, initial evidence does underline the importance of such inquiry. This review summarizes initial evidence of systematic, unintended effects of health messaging on mental well-being and highlights fruitful avenues for future work in this space.

Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy in U.S. Prisons: Perspectives from a Statewide Survey of Incarcerated People

Much of the American response to the COVID-19 pandemic was characterized by a divergence between general public opinion and public health policy. With little attention paid to individuals incarcerated during this time, there is limited direct evidence regarding how incarcerated people perceived efforts to mediate the harms of COVID-19. Prisons operate as a microcosm of society in many ways but they also face unique public health challenges. This study examines vaccine hesitancy-and acceptance-among a sample of individuals incarcerated within adult prisons in Pennsylvania. Using administrative records as well as rich attitudinal data from a survey of the incarcerated population, this study identifies a variety of social and historical factors that are-and are not-associated with an incarcerated person's willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Our findings highlight vaccination challenges unique to the carceral context and offer policy recommendations to improve trust in credible health messengers and health service provision for this often overlooked but vulnerable population.

Patient concerns and physician strategies for addressing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy

OBJECTIVE

COVID-19 vaccination is critical for reducing serious illness and hospitalizations, yet many remain hesitant. We conducted a survey of frontline physicians to identify patient concerns and physician strategies to address COVID-19 vaccine-hesitancy.

METHODS

A national random sample of physicians in frontline specialties selected from a comprehensive list of practicing physicians in the U.S. were emailed a survey in August 2021. Multiple choice and open-ended questions inquired about patient concerns related to the COVID-19 vaccines and strategies used by physicians to counter vaccine misinformation and encourage vaccine-hesitant patients. Weighting was applied to achieve representativeness and reduce non-response bias. Network analysis examined co-occurring patient concerns. Open-ended responses on communication strategies were coded via thematic analysis. Multi-variable logistic regression examined associations between physician and pandemic characteristics with patient concerns and use of communication strategies.

RESULTS

531 physicians responded: primary care (241); emergency medicine (142); critical care (84); hospitalists (34); and infectious disease (30). Weighted response balance statistics showed excellent balance between respondents and nonrespondents. On average, physicians reported four patient vaccine concerns. Safety, side effects, vaccine misinformation, and mistrust in government were most common, and often co-occurring. 297 physicians described communication strategies: 180 (61 %) provided vaccine education and 94 (32 %) created a safe space for vaccine discussion. Narrative responses from physicians provided compelling examples of both successes and communication challenges arising from misinformation. Compared with emergency medicine, critical care (OR 2.45, 95 % CI 1.14, 5.24), infectious disease (OR 2.45, 95 % CI 1.00, 6.02), and primary care physicians (OR 1.66, 95 % CI 1.02, 2.70) were more likely to provide communication strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Many physicians engage with vaccine hesitant patients using a variety of strategies. Dissemination of effective system and physician-level communication interventions could enhance physician success.

Trust in primary health care and COVID-19 vaccine uptake among Iranian pediatric: a web-based cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Children are the most vulnerable group to diseases. Thus, it's critical to evaluate parents' or guardians' willingness to vaccinate their children. This study aims to investigate the prevalence and predictors of pediatric COVID-19 vaccination in Iran and its relationship with trust in the Primary Health Care (PHC) system.

METHOD

A cross-sectional online survey of 549 Iranian parents was conducted between January and March 2023. This study collected data from all provinces of Iran using a questionnaire shared on Google Forms and various social media platforms. After considering various background factors, we used a multivariable logistic regression model. This model explored how trust in the PHC system and parent-related and child-related factors were related to parents' vaccine uptake for their children.

RESULTS

Of 549 parents aged between 19 and 67 years (median = 38 years), 65.2% (358) were female. The prevalence of vaccine uptake among parents was 46.8%. After adjusting for background features, child's age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91), vaccine doses (1-dose: AOR 14.72, 95% CI 6.44-33.65, 2-dose: AOR 32.54, 95% CI 15.22-69.57), child's disease (AOR 5.31, 95% CI 2.19-12.85), and trust in PHC (AOR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02) were associated with parental uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggest that the child's age, vaccine doses received, diseases, and trust in PHC are significant predictors of parental uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine for children in Iran. The results can be used in service planning regarding children's COVID-19 vaccination.

Measuring COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among college students with disabilities: Sociodemographic and psychological correlates of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy

Objective: The purpose of the study was to explore characteristics of vaccine hesitancy and behaviors among college students with disabilities. Participants and Methods: Participants consisted of 105 college students with disabilities (Mage=26.82, SD = 8.42), and a majority of participants were female (69.5%) and Hispanic (85%). Results: No demographic differences were observed in vaccine hesitancy scores in this sample. Those who do not know where to get reliable information about COVID-19 vaccination had higher scores on vaccine hesitancy than those who know how to obtain reliable information; and participants who had a negative experience with a previous vaccination also had higher scores of vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, findings demonstrated COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scores were negatively associated with openness to experience personality trait and COVID-19-related perceived stress. Conclusions: Implications provide additional insight into factors associated with vaccine hesitancy among college students with disabilities.

Sentiment analysis of Indonesian tweets on COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccinations

Background

Sentiments and opinions regarding COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccination on Indonesian-language Twitter are scarcely reported in one comprehensive study, and thus were aimed at our study. We also analyzed fake news and facts, and Twitter engagement to understand people's perceptions and beliefs that determine public health literacy.

Methods

We collected 3,489,367 tweets data from January 2020 to August 2021. We analyzed factual and fake news using the string comparison method. The difflib library was used to measure similarity. The user's engagement was analyzed by averaging the engagement metrics of tweets, retweets, favorites, replies, and posts shared with sentiments and opinions regarding COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination.

Result

Positive sentiments on COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination dominated, however, the negative sentiments increased during the beginning of the implementation of restrictions on community activities (PPKM).  The tweets were dominated by the importance of health protocols (washing hands, keeping distance, and wearing masks). Several types of vaccines were on top of the word count in the vaccine subtopic. Acceptance of the vaccination increased during the studied period, and the fake news was overweighed by the facts. The tweets were dynamic and showed that the engaged topics were changed from the nature of COVID-19 to the vaccination and virus mutation which peaked in the early and middle terms of 2021. The public sentiment and engagement were shifted from hesitancy to anxiety towards the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines, whilst changed again into wariness on an uprising of the delta variant.

Conclusion

Understanding public sentiment and opinion can help policymakers to plan the best strategy to cope with the pandemic. Positive sentiments and fact-based opinions on COVID-19, and COVID-19 vaccination had been shown predominantly. However, sufficient health literacy levels could yet be predicted and sought for further study.

"COVID is a huge jigsaw puzzle that I am trying to make sense of myself": Exploring the perceptions towards the COVID-19 vaccine communication strategy in Australia amongst unvaccinated Australian adults

The COVID-19 pandemic and the associated introduction of a novel vaccine has provided researchers with the opportunity to investigate how to support vaccine acceptance and reduce hesitancy using novel approaches. This study aimed to understand the perceptions of COVID-19 unvaccinated Australian adults towards the COVID-19 vaccines and the factors influencing their vaccine decision-making. We also explored their attitudes towards vaccine communication strategies and the availability and quality of resources to support decision-making and preferences during future public health emergencies. In-depth interviews were undertaken with 35 members of the Australian community who self-identified as being unvaccinated against COVID-19 from September to December 2021 and did not intend to vaccinate. Key themes that emerged focused on past experiences of vaccination, feelings of being coerced or pushed into vaccination, concerns about transparency around the development processes used for the COVID-19 vaccines, the value of getting vaccinated and issues regarding the mandates being used. Participants acknowledged that they would be open to talking to peers but held some reservations about the process. Requirements for vaccination have now been lifted in many countries. While governments should continue to strive to promote COVID-19 primary and booster vaccines going forward, this research suggests that there will be a small proportion of the community who continue to actively decline the vaccine. Further work is needed to understand the strategies that can support decision-making during pandemics amongst people who remain uncertain about the need for the vaccines or are concerned about vaccine safety. This includes innovatively exploring the role of peer-to-peer communication and the influence it may have on correcting misunderstandings and supporting confidence.

Meaningful Media Experiences and Vaccination Message Communication: An Experimental Study with Vaccine-Hesitant Individuals

Guided by the eudaimonic media and the health persuasion literature, the current study explores how meaningful emotions elicited from entertainment media exposure decreases anti-vaccination attitudes among vaccine-hesitant individuals. Results of a between-subjects experiment (N = 409) showed that participants who viewed meaningful music videos (vs. neutral videos) and vaccination messages embedded in the user-generated comments reported more empathy, less reactance, and less anti-vaccination attitudes. Multigroup analysis revealed that this association was held for participants who were hesitant about whether they would get fully vaccinated, but not for participants who were determined to not get vaccinated. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

Extending the Knowledge Gap Hypothesis to Narrative Persuasion: Parents' Information-Seeking Intention and Learning About Adolescent Children's Covid-19 Vaccination

The gap in knowledge and information-seeking between high and low socioeconomic status (SES) has been well documented. This study extends this knowledge gap hypothesis to narrative persuasion in the context of parents' knowledge and information-seeking intention concerning adolescents' COVID-19 vaccination. It specifically tests if the gap is moderated by a message type (narrative vs. non-narrative). An online quasi-experiment, with a 2 (participants' education level: high vs. low) × 3 (message type: narrative vs. non-narrative vs. no-message) between-subject design, showed a main effect of education level (i.e., parents with a higher [vs. lower] education level rated a higher intention to seek information and provided more correct answers on questions about adolescents' COVID-19 vaccination) and an interaction between the two factors. The interaction showed that the gap between high- and low-education groups in information-seeking intention disappeared among those who read the narrative or non-narrative, and the gap in knowledge disappeared among those who read the narrative. Study findings suggest the utility of narratives in narrowing the gap in knowledge and information-seeking to improve parents' decisions on child vaccination.

Barriers to COVID-19 Vaccination in a Troop of Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team Marines: Observational Study

BACKGROUND

In 2019, the World Health Organization declared the reluctance to vaccinate despite the availability of vaccination services as one of the top 10 threats to global health. In early 2021, self-reported reluctance to vaccinate among military personnel might have been considered a significant threat to national security. Having a choice architecture that made COVID-19 vaccination optional rather than required for military personnel could have inadvertently undermined military readiness if vaccination uptake did not reach an acceptable threshold.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this observational study was to examine Marines' self-reported reasons for planning to decline the COVID-19 vaccine to understand their barriers to vaccination.

METHODS

As the vaccination became available to 1 company of Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) Marines in early 2021, company command required those planning to decline vaccination to write an essay with up to 5 reasons for their choice. These essays provided the data for this study. Qualitative descriptive analysis with elements from grounded theory was used to thematically categorize FAST Marines' written reasons for planning to decline the COVID-19 vaccine into a codebook describing 8 key behavioral determinants. Interrater agreement among 2 qualitatively trained researchers was very good (κ=0.81).

RESULTS

A troop of 47 Marines provided 235 reasons why they planned to decline the COVID-19 vaccine. The most frequent reasons were difficulty understanding health information (105/235, 45%), low estimates of risk (33/235, 14%), and fear of physical discomfort (29/235, 12%). Resulting interventions directly targeted Marines' self-reported reasons by reducing barriers (eg, normalized getting the vaccine), increasing vaccine benefits (eg, improved access to base gyms and recreational facilities), and increasing nonvaccine friction (eg, required in writing 5 reasons for declining the vaccine).

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the barriers military personnel experience toward COVID-19 vaccination remains critical as vaccine acquisition and availability continue to protect military personnel. Insights from subpopulations like FAST Marines can enhance our ability to identify barriers and appropriate intervention techniques to influence COVID-19 vaccination behaviors.

The Relationship of Vaccine Uptake and COVID-19 Infections Among Nursing Home Staff and Residents in Missouri: A Measure of Risk by Community Mobility

BACKGROUND

As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed across the United States, older adults living in nursing home (NH) facilities were disproportionately affected because of living in communal spaces with close proximity to others, age-related medical conditions, and constant contact with staff who may support multiple clients and facilities. While these populations are particularly at risk, there has been limited research focused on the management of the potential vectors of COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

Data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) COVID-19 reporting system assessing weekly observations of COVID-19 case counts among NH residents and COVID-19 vaccination rates among NH staff and residents in the states of Missouri and Illinois (n = 877) from May 24, 2021, to August 28, 2021, were used. This ecological study, using results from the CMS COVID-19 reporting system, local COVID-19 rates, and NH-level demographic characteristics, conducted a zero inflation mode to determine the association between NH staff vaccine uptake and COVID-19 cases among NH residents.

RESULTS

Among the total 11 195 weekly observations within the NH facilities, zero cases of COVID-19 were reported during 10 683 (95%) of those weeks, supporting the use of a zero-inflated model. Results show that staff vaccination rates were significantly associated with a decrease in COVID-19 mortality. This study identified that for every percentage increase in staff vaccine coverage, the rate of COVID-19 among residents decreased by 2%.

DISCUSSION

These findings suggest that NH staff vaccination rates are significantly associated with the rate of COVID-19 outbreaks among NH residents. Community median income was associated with an increased likelihood of infection. Future research that explores associations with employment benefits and staff mobility, particularly in vulnerable populations, should be implemented in future vaccination strategic planning.

What influences trust in and understanding of clinical trials? An analysis of information and communication technology use and online health behavior from the Health Information National Trends Survey

BACKGROUND

Using information and communication technologies to seek, discuss, and share health-related information influences people's trust and knowledge of several health practices. However, we know little about the associations between individuals' information and communication technology use and their perceptions of trust and knowledge of clinical trials. Examining these associations may lead to the identification of target audiences and channels for developing effective educational interventions and campaigns about clinical trials.

METHODS

In this study, we analyzed Health Information National Trends Survey data to document perceptions of clinical trial-related knowledge and trust that were recently added as questions in this annual national survey of US adults. We also examined correlates of these clinical trial perceptions that included sociodemographic factors and individuals' use of information and communication technologies to seek health information, discuss such information with their healthcare providers, and share the information in their network.

RESULTS

More than 90% of participants had no or limited perceived knowledge about clinical trials. Knowledge was higher among those who seek or discuss health-related information online. Differences in perceived knowledge and trust emerged for some racial/ethnic subgroups and other demographic factors. Providers were considered the most trusted source of information (73.6%), followed by health organizations (19.4%) and social support (7.1%). Trust in health organizations compared to health providers was higher among those who used online resources to share health information online with others. Trust in social support was significantly higher among those who used information and communication technologies to communicate about health.

CONCLUSION

Based on these findings, we recommend developing online resources about clinical trials to be distributed through social media. These resources should facilitate a dialogue and be targeted to several groups considering their information and communication technologies' use.

Temporal variations of vaccine hesitancy amid the COVID-19 outbreaks in Hong Kong

To inform the dynamic adjustments of vaccination campaigns, this study examined the transitions among vaccine hesitancy profiles over the COVID-19 pandemic progression and their predictors and outcomes. The transition patterns among hesitancy profiles over three periods were identified using a latent transition analysis with individuals from a longitudinal cohort study since the emergence of COVID-19 in Hong Kong. Four profiles (i.e., skeptics, apathetics, fence-sitters, and believers) emerged consistently over time. From Period 1 (third and fourth pandemic waves) to Period 2 (dormant period, vaccine rollout), 14.17% of believers became fence-sitters (ambivalization), and 12.11% of fence-sitters became apathetics (apathetization). From Period 2 to Period 3 (omicron surge and vaccine mandates), 20.21% of believers became fence-sitters. Lower trust in government predicted a transition to skepticism, whereas higher trust predicted the opposite. Staying as believers was associated with decreased hygienic and social distancing behavior. The stable hesitancy profiles amid the rapid vaccine uptake suggest that structural factors rather than personal agency may drive the surge. Ambivalization and apathetization may signal disengagement in preventive behaviors. Trust in the government is crucial in the pandemic response. Public health interventions may improve compliance with guidelines and prevent skepticism and apathy.

Empathic Engagement With the COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitant in Private Facebook Groups: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Vaccine misinformation has been widely spread on social media, but attempts to combat it have not taken advantage of the attributes of social media platforms for health education.

METHODS

The objective was to test the efficacy of moderated social media discussions about COVID-19 vaccines in private Facebook groups. Unvaccinated U.S. adults were recruited using Amazon's Mechanical Turk and randomized. In the intervention group, moderators posted two informational posts per day for 4 weeks and engaged in relationship-building interactions with group members. In the control group, participants received a referral to Facebook's COVID-19 Information Center. Follow-up surveys with participants (N = 478) were conducted 6 weeks post-enrollment.

RESULTS

At 6 weeks follow-up, no differences were found in vaccination rates. Intervention participants were more likely to show improvements in their COVID-19 vaccination intentions (vs. stay same or decline) compared with control (p = .03). They also improved more in their intentions to encourage others to vaccinate for COVID-19. There were no differences in COVID-19 vaccine confidence or intentions between groups. General vaccine and responsibility to vaccinate were higher in the intervention compared with control. Most participants in the intervention group reported high levels of satisfaction. Participants engaged with content (e.g., commented, reacted) 11.8 times on average over the course of 4 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Engaging with vaccine-hesitant individuals in private Facebook groups improved some COVID-19 vaccine-related beliefs and represents a promising strategy.

Global COVID-19 vaccine acceptance level and its determinants: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 vaccination is essential for reducing disease burden on a worldwide scale. The success of this strategy will largely depend on how well vaccines are received. Previous reviews had produced contradictory results, and there had been no umbrella review. Therefore, the objective of this umbrella review was to combine the contradictory data regarding the COVID-19 vaccination's global acceptance rate and its contributing factors.

METHODS

Using PRISMA guideline, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus and Google Scholar which reported COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and/or its determinants were searched. The quality of the included studies was assessed using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). A weighted inverse variance random-effects model was applied to find the pooled estimates. The subgroup analysis, heterogeneity, publication bias and sensitivity analysis were also assessed.

RESULT

Twenty-two SRM with 10,433,306 study participants were included. The pooled COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate globally is found to be 60.23 (95% CI: 58.27, 62.18). In low-income countries, the pooled level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was found to be 54.07(50.31, 57.83) while this magnitude is 64.32 (62.24,66.40) among studies across the globe. Higher level of education (AOR =1.96; 95% CI:1.20, 2.73), good level of knowledge (2.20; 95% CI:1.36, 3.03), favourable attitude (AOR =4.50; 95% CI:2.89, 6.12), previous history of COVID-19 infection (AOR =3.41; 95% CI:1.77, 5.06), male sex (AOR =1.62; 95% CI:1.47, 1.77), and chronic disease (AOR =1.54; 95% CI:1.18, 1.90) were predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance.

CONCLUSION

The pooled level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance highly varied and found to be unacceptably low particularly in low-income countries. Higher level of education, good level of knowledge, favourable attitude, previous history of COVID-19, male sex, and chronic disease were factors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate. A collaborative effort of stakeholders such as policymakers, and vaccine campaign program planners is needed to improve the acceptance rate of COVID-19 vaccine.