COVID-19 booster uptake among US adults: Assessing the impact of vaccine attributes, incentives, and context in a choice-based experiment

One year later: What role did trust in public officials and the medical profession play in decisions to get a booster and to overcome vaccine hesitancy?

Physicians may have an important role to play in promoting boosters as well as reducing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, but the relationship between hesitancy and trust in the medical profession and these behaviors has been underexplored. A representative online panel of 1,967 US adults that included oversamples of minoritized and rural populations were surveyed in April 2021 and June 2022 regarding their booster and vaccine status and intentions, their views of the medical profession, and their levels of trust in their own doctors, and national and state/local officials. Eighty percent of those vaccinated in 2021 had received a booster by 2022, while fewer than half of those initially reluctant to get a vaccine had gotten one by Wave 2 of the survey. Mean factor scores were calculated for response to a validated scale measuring trust in the medical profession. Linear and logistic regression models estimated the relationship between these factors scores and trust in other officials for those vaccinated as well initial hesitaters/refusers in Wave 1, controlling for population factors. Trust in one's own physician was associated with those vaccinated/eager to be vaccinated getting a booster, while trust in the medical profession was associated with getting a vaccine among those who had previously refused or were hesitant. Trust in other experts was not significantly associated with these behaviors, but wide confidence intervals suggest a need for future research. Innovative strategies, including mobilizing the medical community is needed to address reluctance, uncertainty, and distrust of therapeutic agents in pandemic response.

Do COVID-19 Vaccination Policies Backfire? The Effects of Mandates, Vaccination Passports, and Financial Incentives on COVID-19 Vaccination

Faced with the challenges of motivating people to vaccinate, many countries have introduced policy-level interventions to encourage vaccination against COVID-19. For example, mandates were widely imposed requiring individuals to vaccinate to work and attend school, and vaccination passports required individuals to show proof of vaccination to travel and access public spaces and events. Furthermore, some countries also began offering financial incentives for getting vaccinated. One major criticism of these policies was the possibility that they would produce reactance and thus undermine voluntary vaccination. This article therefore reviews relevant empirical evidence to examine whether this is indeed the case. Specifically, we devote separate sections to reviewing and discussing the impacts of three major policies that were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic: vaccination mandates, vaccination passports, and the provision of financial incentives. A careful analysis of the evidence provides little support that these policies backfire but instead can effectively promote vaccination at the population level. The policies are not without limitations, however, such as their inability to mobilize those that are strongly hesitant to vaccines. Finally, we discuss how policy-level interventions should be designed and implemented to address future epidemics and pandemics.

Social network, political climate, income inequality, and Americans uptake of monovalent COVID-19 booster

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed an unprecedented impact on Americans for over three years. To control the damage, a booster shot becomes increasingly necessary because the efficacy of the initial vaccine is waning and new variants of the virus are emerging. This study aims to understand factors at both individual and state levels that influence one's decision to take the monovalent booster. We merged data from a national survey administered in the Spring of 2022 with state-level indicators of the political climate, income inequality, and public health conditions. Multilevel logistic regression is adopted for statistical estimation. Findings show contrasting effects of the social network. More vaccinated people in one's network promote booster uptake, while more family members and close friends who contracted the virus in one's network inhibit booster uptake. In addition, residents of states with more votes for the Democratic candidate in the 2020 general election are more likely to take the booster. Meanwhile, residents from states with high income inequality are less likely to become boosted. This study identified multilevel determinants of the individual decision to receive the monovalent COVID-19 booster. The results imply the need to leverage the social network, weaken partisanship salience, and reduce income inequality to encourage booster uptake.

Exploring the artificial intelligence "Trust paradox": Evidence from a survey experiment in the United States

Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) are poised to transform society, national defense, and the economy by increasing efficiency, precision, and safety. Yet, widespread adoption within society depends on public trust and willingness to use AI-enabled technologies. In this study, we propose the possibility of an AI "trust paradox," in which individuals' willingness to use AI-enabled technologies exceeds their level of trust in these capabilities. We conduct a two-part study to explore the trust paradox. First, we conduct a conjoint analysis, varying different attributes of AI-enabled technologies in different domains-including armed drones, general surgery, police surveillance, self-driving cars, and social media content moderation-to evaluate whether and under what conditions a trust paradox may exist. Second, we use causal mediation analysis in the context of a second survey experiment to help explain why individuals use AI-enabled technologies that they do not trust. We find strong support for the trust paradox, particularly in the area of AI-enabled police surveillance, where the levels of support for its use are both higher than other domains but also significantly exceed trust. We unpack these findings to show that several underlying beliefs help account for public attitudes of support, including the fear of missing out, optimism that future versions of the technology will be more trustworthy, a belief that the benefits of AI-enabled technologies outweigh the risks, and calculation that AI-enabled technologies yield efficiency gains. Our findings have important implications for the integration of AI-enabled technologies in multiple settings.

A Systematic Review on Sociodemographic, Financial and Psychological Factors Associated with COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Hesitancy among Adult Population

Background: While considerable evidence supports the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, a sizable population expresses vaccine hesitancy. As per the World Health Organization, vaccine hesitancy is one of the top 10 hazards to global health. Vaccine hesitancy varies across countries, with India reporting the least vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy was higher toward COVID-19 booster doses than previous shots. Therefore, identifying factors determining COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitance (VBH) is the sine qua non of a successful vaccination campaign. Methodology: This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) 2020 standards. A total of 982 articles were pooled from Scopus, PubMed and Embase, while 42 articles that addressed the factors of COVID-19 VBH were finally included for further analysis. Result: We identified factors responsible for VBH and divided them into three major groups: sociodemographic, financial, and psychological. Hence, 17 articles stated age to be a major factor for vaccine hesitancy, with most reports suggesting a negative correlation between age and fear of poor vaccination outcomes. Nine studies found females expressing greater vaccine hesitancy than males. Trust deficit in science (n = 14), concerns about safety and efficacy (n = 12), lower levels of fear regarding infection (n = 11), and worry about side effects (n = 8) were also reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Blacks, Democrats, and pregnant women showed high vaccine hesitancy. Few studies have stated income, obesity, social media, and the population living with vulnerable members as factors influencing vaccine hesitancy. A study in India showed that 44.1% of vaccine hesitancy towards booster doses could be attributed dominantly to low income, rural origin, previously unvaccinated status, or living with vulnerable individuals. However, two other Indian studies reported a lack of availability of vaccination slots, a lack of trust in the government, and concerns regarding safety as factors for vaccine hesitancy toward booster doses. Conclusion: Many studies have confirmed the multifactorial nature of VBH, which necessitates multifaceted, individually tailored interventions that address all potentially modifiable factors. This systematic review chiefly recommends strategizing the campaign for booster doses by identifying and evaluating the reasons for vaccine hesitancy, followed by appropriate communication (at both individual and community levels) about the benefits of booster doses and the risk of losing immunity without them.

Factors Associated With Marshallese and Hispanic Adults' Willingness to Receive a COVID-19 Booster Dose

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

New variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19 will continue to develop and spread globally. The Omicron variant identified in November 2021 has many lineages. Variants spread quickly and can infect previously vaccinated individuals, prompting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to update vaccination recommendations. While ~230 million Americans received the initially-recommended vaccine sequence, booster uptake has been much lower; less than half of fully vaccinated individuals report receiving a booster. Racial disparities also mark patterns of COVID-19 vaccination booster uptake. This study explored willingness and motivations to get a COVID-19 booster among a diverse sample of participants.

METHODS

We used convenience sampling to recruit participants 18 years of age or older who attended a community vaccine event. We conducted informal interviews during the recommended 15-min post-vaccination wait time with 55 participants who attended vaccine events at Marshallese and Hispanic community locations and comprised the recruitment pool for individual interviews. Using a qualitative descriptive design, we conducted in-depth follow-up interviews with 9 participants (Marshallese n = 5, Hispanic n = 4) to explore willingness and motivations to get boosted. We used rapid thematic template analysis to review informal interview summaries and formal interviews. The research team resolved data discrepancies by consensus.

RESULTS

Participants reported high willingness to get boosted, especially if boosters were recommended in the future to protect against serious illness and mitigate the spread of COVID-19. This finding underscores how essential including recommendations to get a COVID-19 booster from trusted sources in health messaging and educational campaigns may be for increasing booster uptake. Participants described their preference for receiving future COVID-19 boosters, reporting that they would attend similar vaccine events, especially those held at faith-based organizations and facilitated by the same community partners, community health workers, and research staff. This finding shows how community engagement can overcome barriers to vaccination (ie, transportation, language, and fear of discrimination) by providing services in preferred community locations with trusted community partners.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings document high willingness to get a COVID-19 booster, emphasize the role of recommendations from trusted sources in motivating booster uptake, and highlight the importance of community engagement to address disparities in vaccination coverage and reach.