Child and adolescent COVID-19 vaccination status and reasons for non-vaccination by parental vaccination status

Coverage and determinants of COVID-19 child vaccination in Munich, Germany in October 2022-January 2023: Results of the COVIP-Virenwächter study

COVID-19 vaccination reduces the risk of severe disease, in children as well as adults. We studied COVID-19 vaccination coverage among children, parental COVID-19 vaccination intent for their children and determinants of vaccination among children to inform communication strategies. We invited parents of children aged 6 months-11 years in Munich, Germany, to an anonymous online survey between 13.10.2022 and 15.01.2023. Parents reported COVID-19 vaccination status and, for unvaccinated children, vaccination intent per child. We determined vaccination coverage (≥ 1 dose) and parental intent, and subsequently used logistic regression to identify determinants of vaccination, including the 5C psychological antecedents of vaccination (confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, collective responsibility). In total, 339 parents reported on 591 children. Vaccination coverage was 7% (6/86) amongst 6-months-4-year-olds and 59% (295/498) amongst 5-11-year-olds. For unvaccinated 6-months-4-year-olds, 31% of parents reported high, 13% medium, 56% low vaccination intent; for 5-11-year-olds 8% reported high, 20% medium, 71% low intent. Positive determinants of vaccination were older child age, child belonging to a clinically vulnerable group, as well as parental COVID-19 vaccination, higher education level, country of birth Germany, and high level of trust in official guidelines; a negative determinant was previous vaccination refusal. For 5-11-year-olds, additional positive determinants were higher confidence and lower complacency.    Conclusion: While a substantial proportion of 5-11-year-olds were vaccinated against COVID-19, coverage was low among 6-months-4-year-olds. Parental vaccination intent for unvaccinated children was low. Vaccination communication should take into account parental socio-demographic characteristics and specifically address individual risks and benefits of child vaccination. What is Known: • COVID-19 vaccination lowers severe disease risk in all ages. • Germany recommends vaccination for 5-11-years-olds since December 2021 and for 6 months-4 year-olds since November 2022. What is New: • In Munich, vaccine uptake was high in 5-11-year-olds but parental intent for not yet vaccinated children was low; the opposite was the case for 6-months-4-year-olds; vaccination determinants were eligibility, parental education, birth country and general vaccination hesitancy; psychological antecedents were confidence and complacency. • Tailored interventions should address guidelines, health literacy, cultural sensitivity, and boost confidence in vaccines and institutions while raising awareness of COVID-19 risks for children.

Current state of COVID-19 in children: 4 years on

Children have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite evidence of a very low risk of severe disease, children were subjected to extensive lockdown, restriction and mitigation measures, including school closures, to control the rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 in most parts of the world. In this review we summarise the UK experience of COVID-19 in children four years into the largest and longest pandemic of this century. We address the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection, immunity, transmission, severity and outcomes in children. We also assess the implementation, uptake, effectiveness and impact of COVID-19 vaccination, as well as the emergence, evolution and near disappearance of PIMS-TS (paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2) and current understanding of long COVID in children. This review consolidates current knowledge on childhood COVID-19 and emphasises the importance of continued research and the need for research-driven public health actions and policy decisions, especially in the context of new variants and future vaccines.

Child and adolescent COVID-19 vaccination coverage by educational setting, United States

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic changed the setting of education for many children in the U.S. Understanding COVID-19 vaccination coverage by educational setting is important for developing targeted messages, increasing parents' confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, and protecting all children from severe effects of COVID-19 infection.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS

Using data from the Household Pulse Survey (n = 25,173) collected from December 9-19, 2022, January 4-16, 2023, and February 1-13, 2023, this study assessed factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination and reasons for non-vaccination among school-aged children 5-11 and adolescents 12-17 by educational setting.

RESULTS

Among children 5-11 years, COVID-19 vaccination coverage was higher among those who received in-person instruction (53.7%) compared to those who were homeschooled (32.5%). Furthermore, among adolescents 12-17 years, COVID-19 vaccination coverage was higher among those who received in-person instruction (73.5%) or virtual/online instruction (70.1%) compared to those who were homeschooled (51.0%). Children and adolescents were more likely to be vaccinated if the parental respondent had been vaccinated compared to those who had not. Among children and adolescents who were homeschooled, main reasons for non-vaccination were concern about side effects (45.4-51.6%), lack of trust in COVID-19 vaccines (45.0-50.9%), and lack of trust in the government (32.7-39.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Children and adolescents who were home-schooled during the pandemic had lower vaccination coverage than those who attended school in person, and adolescents who were home-schooled had lower vaccination coverage than those who received virtual instruction. Based on the reasons for non-vaccination identified in this study, increasing parental confidence in vaccines, and reducing barriers to access are important for supporting COVID-19 vaccination for school-age children.

Rethinking immunization programs through the life course approach

The world continues to undergo a profound demographic shift toward increasing longevity -but quality of life is not improving correspondingly. At the same time, countries are taking stock of the negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on national immunization programs. The pandemic exacerbated the declines in vaccination coverage for multiple vaccine-preventable diseases (VPD). To ensure that all persons receive all the vaccines for which they are eligible, it is time to consider how applying a life course approach (LCA) to immunization programs can help reinvigorate and redesign actions for greater vaccine uptake. In this mini review, we present the key concepts and principles of the LCA as applied to national immunization programs. Also, we offer recommendations on how health systems can achieve regional and national goals to ensure all people receive the recommended vaccine doses at every stage of life, thus ensuring the greatest benefits for individuals and societies.

Social Processes and COVID-19 Vaccination of Children of Hesitant Mothers

OBJECTIVE

Investigate relationships between pediatric COVID-19 vaccination and social processes of healthcare provider recommendations and school encouragement to provide insights into social processes that may support pediatric COVID-19 vaccination among hesitant mothers.

METHODS

We analyzed survey data from a subsample (n = 509) of vaccine-hesitant mothers to child patients (ages 2 to 17) in regional clinics across Arkansas. Data were collected between September 16th and December 6th, 2022. Full information maximum likelihood multivariable logistic regression was conducted to evaluate associations with pediatric COVID-19 vaccination.

RESULTS

Adjusted odds of pediatric COVID-19 vaccination were more than three times greater when a child's healthcare provider recommended vaccination compared to when they did not (aOR = 3.52; 95% CI[2.06, 6.01]). Adjusted odds of pediatric COVID-19 vaccination were 85% greater when a child's school encouraged parents to vaccinate compared to when the school did not (aOR = 1.85; 95% CI[1.13, 3.03]).

CONCLUSIONS

For pediatric COVID-19 vaccination, having a personal healthcare provider is not significantly different from having no personal healthcare provider if they do not recommend the child be vaccinated.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinical and public health interventions should consider social processes of healthcare provider recommendations and school encouragement.

Does education influence COVID-19 vaccination? A global view

After the recent hard attempts felt on a global scale, notably in the health sector, the steady efforts of scientists have been materialized in maybe one of the most expected findings of the last decades, i.e. the launching of the COVID-19 vaccines. Although it is not our goal to plead for vaccination, as the decision in this regard is a matter of individual choice, we believe it is necessary and enlightening to analyze how one's educational status interferes with COVID-19 vaccination. There are discrepancies between world states vis-à-vis their well-being and their feedback to crises, and from the collection of features that can segregate the states in handling vaccination, in this paper, the spotlight is on education. We are referring to this topic because, generally, researches converge rather on the linkage between economic issues and COVID-19 vaccination, while education levels are less tackled in relation to this. To notice the weight of each type of education (primary, secondary, tertiary) in this process, we employ an assortment of statistical methods, for three clusters: 45 low-income countries (LICs), 72 middle-income countries (MICs) and 53 high-income countries (HICs). The estimates suggest that education counts in the COVID-19 vaccination, the tertiary one having the greatest meaning in accepting it. It is also illustrated that the imprint of education on vaccination fluctuates across the country groups scrutinized, with HICs recording the upper rates. The heterogeneity of COVID-19 vaccination-related behaviors should determine health authorities to treat this subject differently. To expand the COVID-19 vaccines uptake, they should be in an ongoing dialogue with all population categories and, remarkably, with those belonging to vulnerable communities, originated mostly in LICs. Education is imperative for vaccination, and it would ought to be on the schedule of any state, for being assimilated into health strategies and policies.

COVID-19 vaccination in urban American Indian and Alaska Native children: Parental characteristics, beliefs and attitudes associated with vaccine acceptance

Background

Little is known about vaccination rates for American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) parents and their children, or parental decisions in this regard. Improving vaccination rates is a serious concern due to the disproportionate incidence and morbidity of COVID-19 in AI/AN people.

Purpose

Our goal was to describe urban AI/AN parental attributes associated with COVID-19 vaccination of their children.

Methods

Survey participants (n = 572) were ≥18 years of age, had children ≥5 years of age, AI/AN, and seen at one of six urban health organizations serving primarily AI/AN people within the prior year. They were asked about gender, age, education, marital status, perceived stress, trauma history, whether they had received the COVID-19 vaccine, tested positive for COVID-19 in the past, and if their child was vaccinated. They were also asked about 16 vaccine hesitancy reasons.

Results

Parental vaccination rate was 82%, with 59% of their children vaccinated. Parents who vaccinated their children were older, had higher education, lower stress and trauma, and were more likely to be vaccinated compared to parents who did not vaccinate their children. Forty-two percent of parents indicated they would likely vaccinate their unvaccinated child in the future. Sixteen vaccine hesitancy reasons revealed four factors: distrust, inconvenience, lack of concern about the pandemic, and AI/AN concerns. Parents who had no plans to vaccinate their children had the highest vaccine distrust and lack of concern about the pandemic. Parents with greater vaccine distrust and AI/AN specific concern reported significantly greater trauma history and higher levels of education.

Conclusion

Even though vaccination rates for AI/AN parents and children are high, the consequences of COVID-19 for AI/AN people are more severe than for other US populations. Providers should use trauma-informed, trust-building and culturally competent communication when discussing choices about vaccination with AI/AN parents.

COVID-19 vaccine or booster hesitancy among children aged 6 month-5 years, 5-11 years, and 12-17 years in the United States: An analytic cross-sectional study

With the increased accessibility of COVID-19 vaccine, many households have had concerns when vaccinating children, leading to vaccine hesitancy. This study examined the COVID-19 vaccine and booster hesitancy among children aged 6 months-5 years, 5-11 years, and 12-17 years in the United States. We analyzed data from Phase 3.8 (March 1, 2023 to May 8, 2023) of the Household Pulse Survey (HPS) collected by the U.S. Census Bureau. We conducted survey-weighted multiple logistic regression models in vaccine hesitancy among respondents with children from those three different age groups, controlling for various demographic factors such as COVID-19 vaccination status, COVID-19 positive test results, race/ethnicity, gender at birth, age, region, marital status, educational attainment, household income, health insurance, and children's school type. The percentage of respondents indicating hesitancy towards vaccinating their children (expressing uncertainty, probably not, or definitely not) decreased as their children's age increased. Specifically, the proportion was 57.4% for children aged 6 months-5 years, 43.3% for children aged 5-11 years, and 25.9% for children aged 12-17 years. Concerns about possible side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine were the most prevalent among respondents who expressed vaccine hesitancy, regardless of the level of hesitancy, while those with strong hesitancy showed higher proportions of not believing their children need a vaccine, lack of trust in COVID-19 vaccines and the government, and parents/guardians not vaccinating their children. This study provide insight into our current situation, aiming to build assurance among households regarding the efficacy and benefits of COVID-19 vaccines for children of all ages.

Disparities in child and adolescent COVID-19 vaccination coverage and parental intent toward vaccinations for their children and adolescents

INTRODUCTION

Despite recommendations for COVID-19 primary series completion and booster doses for children and adolescents, coverage has been less than optimal, particularly in some subpopulations. This study explored disparities in childhood/adolescent COVID-19 vaccination, parental intent to vaccinate their children and adolescents, and reasons for non-vaccination in the US.

METHODS

Using the U.S. Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey (HPS), we analyzed households with children aged <18 years using data collected from September 14 to November 14, 2022 (n = 44,929). Child and adolescent COVID-19 vaccination coverage (≥1 dose, completed primary series, and booster vaccination) and parental intentions toward vaccination were assessed by sociodemographic characteristics. Factors associated with child and adolescent vaccination coverage were examined using multivariable regression models. Reasons for non-vaccination were assessed overall, by the child's age group and respondent's age group.

RESULTS

Overall, approximately half (50.1%) of children aged < 18 years were vaccinated against COVID-19 (≥1 dose). Completed primary series vaccination was 44.2% among all children aged <18 years. By age group, completed primary series was 13.2% among children <5 years, 43.9% among children 5-11 years, and 63.3% among adolescents 12-17 years. Booster vaccination among those who completed the primary series was 39.1% among children 5-11 years and 55.3% among adolescents 12-17 years. Vaccination coverage differed by race/ethnicity, educational attainment, household income, region, parental COVID-19 vaccination status, prior COVID-19 diagnosis, child's age group, and parental age group. Parental reluctance was highest for children aged <5 years (46.8%). Main reasons for non-vaccination among reluctant parents were concerns about side effects (53.3%), lack of trust in COVID-19 vaccines (48.7%), and the belief that children do not need a COVID-19 vaccine (38.8%).

CONCLUSION

Disparities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage among children and adolescents continue to exist. Further efforts are needed to increase COVID-19 primary series and booster vaccination and parental confidence in vaccines.

Exclusive and dual influenza and COVID-19 vaccination among U.S. adults and adolescents in 2021

INTRODUCTION

Despite recommendations for influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, studies have documented gaps and disparities in vaccination coverage for adults and adolescents. Understanding the proportion and demographics of those unvaccinated against influenza and/or COVID-19 is important for tailoring appropriate messaging and strategies to increase confidence and uptake.

METHODS

Using the 2021 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), we assessed the prevalence of four vaccination patterns (exclusive influenza vaccination, exclusive COVID-19 vaccination, dual influenza and COVID-19 vaccination, and neither vaccination) by sociodemographic and other characteristics among adults and adolescents 12-17 years. Adjusted multivariable regression analyses were conducted to examine factors associated with each of the four vaccination categories among adults and adolescents.

RESULTS

In 2021, 42.5% of adults and 28.3% of adolescents received both influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, while approximately a quarter (22.4%) of adults and a third (34.0%) of adolescents did not receive either vaccine. Among adults and adolescents, 6.0% and 11.4% were exclusively vaccinated against influenza and 29.1% and 26.4% were exclusively vaccinated against COVID-19, respectively. Among adults, exclusive COVID-19 or dual vaccination was more likely to be associated with older age, non-Hispanic multi/other race, and having a college degree compared to their respective counterparts. Exclusive influenza or neither vaccination was more likely to be associated with younger age, having a high school diploma or less, living below the poverty level, and having a previous COVID-19 diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, approximately two-thirds of adolescents and three-fourths of adults received exclusive influenza or COVID-19 vaccines or both vaccines in 2021. Vaccination patterns differed by sociodemographic and other characteristics. Promoting confidence in vaccines and reducing barriers to access is needed to protect individuals and families from severe health consequences of vaccine-preventable diseases. Being up-to-date with all recommended vaccinations can prevent a future resurgence of hospitalizations and cases.Key messages42.5% of adults and 28.3% of adolescents received both influenza and COVID-19 vaccines in 2021, while approximately a quarter (22.4%) of adults and a third (34.0%) of adolescents did not receive either vaccine; 6.0% of adults and 11.4% of adolescents were exclusively vaccinated against influenza and 29.1% of adults and 26.4% of adolescents were exclusively vaccinated against COVID-19.Among adults, exclusive COVID-19 vaccination or dual vaccination was more likely to be associated with older age, non-Hispanic multi/other race, and having a college degree or higher compared to their respective counterparts; exclusive influenza vaccination or neither vaccination was more likely to be associated with younger age, having a high school diploma or less, living below poverty level, and having a previous COVID-19 diagnosis compared to their respective counterparts.Promoting confidence in vaccines and reducing barriers to access is needed to protect individuals and families from severe health consequences of vaccine-preventable diseases. Being up-to-date with all recommended vaccinations can prevent a future resurgence of hospitalizations and cases, especially as new variants emerge.

Efficacy, safety, and public attitude toward COVID-19 vaccines: A systematic review

Background

This paper reviews some of the literature on the safety and efficacy of different COVID-19 vaccines, the attitudes, and perceptions of people towards the vaccines, and the factor underlying such perceptions and behavior.

Methods

Two major databases (PubMed and Epistemonikos) were checked using search expansion mechanisms and several search strings. After the title, abstract, and full-text analysis, 19 studies were selected for review.

Results

The seven different vaccines studied all have supporting data on their efficacy in the reduction of COVID-19 cases, prevention of hospitalization after infection, and reduction in the mortality rate of COVID-19 patients. There was high hesitancy about the COVID-19 vaccine and the perceived efficacy and safety of the vaccines are less than recorded in clinical data. Distrust of the vaccines, their manufacturers and different institutions and governments, personal beliefs and feelings, age, gender, education, and socioeconomic status were identified factors affecting behaviors towards the COVID-19 vaccines.

Conclusion

Several articles support the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, but general awareness and conception about them vary, including hesitancy, distrust, and some acceptance. Many factors affected the perception and attitude of people toward these vaccines. More clinical data on the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines should be generated to help boost confidence among users.

Association between caregiver opposition to topical fluoride and COVID-19 vaccines

PURPOSE

Caregivers who oppose topical fluoride in dental settings may be opposed to other preventive health treatments, including COVID-19 vaccines. The study objective was to examine the association between caregiver opposition to topical fluoride and COVID-19 vaccines.

METHODS

The study took place at the University of Washington in Seattle, WA. English-speaking caregivers of children aged < 18 years were eligible to participate. An 85-item REDCap survey was administered from February to September 2021. The predictor variable was topical fluoride opposition (no/yes). The outcome was COVID-19 vaccine opposition (no/yes). The models included the following covariates: child and caregiver age; caregiver race and ethnicity, education level, dental insurance type, parenting style, political ideology, and religiosity; and household income. Logistic regression models generated odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Six-hundred-fifty-one caregivers participated, and 403 caregivers with complete data were included in the final regression model. Mean child age was 8.5 years (SD 4.2), mean caregiver age was 42.1 years (SD 9.1), 53.0 % of caregivers were female, 57.3 % self-reported as white, and 65.5 % were insured by Medicaid. There was a significant positive association between topical fluoride and COVID-19 vaccine opposition (OR = 3.13; 95 % CI: 1.87, 5.25; p < 0.001). Other factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine opposition included conservative political views (OR = 2.77; 95 % CI: 1.26, 6.08; p < 0.011) and lower education (OR = 3.47; 95 % CI: 1.44, 8.38; p < 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Caregivers opposed to topical fluoride in dental settings were significantly more likely to oppose COVID-19 vaccines for their child. Future research should identify ways to address both topical fluoride and vaccine opposition to prevent diseases in children.

COVID-19 Adult, Childhood, and Adolescent Vaccination Coverage Among Military and Civilian Families, United States

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic affected the lives of military members and their families, with over 400,000 cases among U.S. military members since the start of the pandemic. The objective of this study is to examine and compare COVID-19 vaccination coverage of military members (active duty and Reserve/National Guard) and their family members (spouses, children, and adolescents) to that of their civilian counterparts using a large, nationally representative study.

METHODS

Data from March 2 to May 9, 2022, of the Household Pulse Survey were analyzed for this study (n = 207,758). COVID-19 vaccination status (≥1 dose) was assessed for military members and their spouses, civilians, and children (aged 5 to 11 and 12 to 17 years) from both military and civilian families. Differences between military members, spouses, and their children compared to civilian adults and children were assessed using chi-squared and t-tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between military status and COVID-19 vaccination after controlling for sociodemographic characteristics. Reasons for not getting vaccinated for adults and children from military and civilian families were assessed.

RESULTS

Compared to civilian adults and adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, military members were more likely to be vaccinated (adjusted prevalence ratio = 1.07, 95% CI: 1.01-1.13). Vaccination coverage between active duty and civilian adults differed by subgroups. For example, among military members, COVID-19 vaccination coverage decreased with increasing age, from 87.5% among those aged 18 to 39 years to 56.0% among those aged ≥55 years. In contrast, among civilian adults, vaccination coverage increased with increasing age, from 78.5% among those aged 18 to 39 years to 91.2% among those aged ≥55 years. Military members were also less likely to be vaccinated than their civilian counterparts if they were Hispanic (68.5% vs. 85.2%), had a Bachelor's degree or higher (87.5% vs. 93.8%), or had $100,000 or more in annual household income (76.7% vs. 92.6%). Military members who had anxiety or depression (70.1%) were less likely to be vaccinated compared to civilian adults (84.4%). Military spouses (74.4%) were less likely to be vaccinated than civilian adults (84.7%). Children and adolescents who were homeschooled (35.1%) or had no preventive checkups in the past year (32.4%) were less likely to be vaccinated than their respective counterparts (52.5% and 54.0%, respectively). Military adults compared to civilian adults were more likely to report lack of trust in the government (47.5% vs. 35.2%) and, for children/adolescents, the belief that the vaccine is not needed (42.1% vs. 28.1%) as reasons for non-vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite vaccine mandates and the high vaccination coverage found among the majority of military members, disparities exist in some subgroups. Educational interventions and increased communication from trusted leaders, such as medical providers and commanders, could increase confidence in vaccines among military families. Ensuring access to vaccines, empowering healthcare providers to recommend vaccines, and reminding parents of missed vaccinations or preventive checkups can help improve vaccination coverage. Achieving high vaccination among military members and their families is essential in protecting those in the forefront of the pandemic response and promoting the safety and security of the nation.

Trends in vaccination schedules and up-to-date status of children 19-35 months, United States, 2015-2020

OBJECTIVES

To estimate trends in, and factors associated with, vaccination patterns and up-to-date immunization status of U.S. children by 19 to 35 months of age.

METHODS

Data from the 2015 to 2020 National Immunization Surveys were used to assess trends in vaccination patterns, up-to-date status, and zero vaccination status of U.S. children by 19-35 months. Vaccination patterns were categorized as: 1) recommended, 2) alternate, or 3) unknown or unclassifiable. Multivariable analyses were conducted to examine factors associated with each vaccination pattern and up-to-date status for all recommended vaccines.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2020, the proportion of U.S. children completing the recommended schedule increased from 62.5% to 69.4%, alternative schedule decreased from 21.6% to 16.2%, and unknown or unclassifiable schedules decreased from 15.9% to 14.3%. In addition, being not up-to-date decreased from 39.7% to 35.6%. There was no change in the percentage of children receiving zero vaccinations from 2015 to 2020 (0.9% to 0.9%). Respondents with lower household income or who were uninsured were more likely to follow an alternate or unknown/unclassifiable schedule, or not be up-to-date with vaccines.

CONCLUSION

Following any schedule other than the recommended schedule was associated with not being up-to-date on immunizations. Increased efforts to catch up on recommended vaccines is important for protecting children's health. Further efforts should be made to improve timely adherence to recommended vaccination schedules, particularly among populations with the largest disparities in coverage through a tailored approach to increase confidence in and access to vaccines.

Parental and Pediatricians’ Attitudes towards COVID-19 Vaccination for Children: Results from Nationwide Samples in Greece

Although many studies have examined factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination and healthcare professionals’ attitudes towards vaccines, less is known about parents’ and pediatricians’ attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination for children. Using two cross-sectional surveys from November to December 2021 in Greece, we aimed to assess parental intention to vaccinate their 5 to 17 years old children against COVID-19 and to evaluate pediatricians’ attitudes towards children’s vaccination against COVID-19. Overall, 439 parents and 135 pediatricians participated. Of them, 240 (54.7%) intended to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. The most commonly reported reasons for non-intention were the short length of clinical trials and the fear of side effects. Only 16.6% of non-intenders would vaccinate their children if the pediatrician recommended it. The factors associated with higher intention to get vaccinated were a parent’s own vaccination against COVID-19, trust in official healthcare guidelines, increased trust in the state and the healthcare system during the pandemic, and older age. Of the pediatricians, 92.6% recommended children’s vaccination, and 75.6% agreed with mandating the vaccine. These findings suggest the need to tailor easy-to-understand messages by well-informed pediatricians to address safety concerns, educate, and clarify misconceptions through targeted interventions among those who currently do not wish to vaccinate their children.