Self-reported COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake among participants from different racial and ethnic groups in the United States and United Kingdom

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and preference for future delivery among language minority, newcomer, and racialized peoples in Canada: a national cross-sectional and longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Despite high COVID-19 vaccine coverage in Canada, vaccine acceptance and preferred delivery among newcomers, racialized persons, and those who primarily speak minority languages are not well understood. This national study explores COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, access to vaccines, and delivery preferences among ethnoculturally diverse population groups.

METHODS

We conducted two national cross-sectional surveys during the pandemic (Dec 2020 and Oct-Nov 2021). Binary logistic regression analysis investigated the association between newcomer, language, and racialized minority respondents' perceptions and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines, experiences of discrimination when accessing health services, and sociodemographic characteristics. McNemar-Bowker tests were used to assess changes in responses collected at two time points.

RESULTS

Among 1630 respondents, 30.8% arrived in Canada within the last five years, 87.4% self-identified as a racialized minority, and 37.2% primarily spoke languages other than English or French. Although single dose COVID-19 vaccine uptake was at 92.7% among respondents, 14.8% experienced difficulty accessing vaccines, citing a need for translated resources or multi-lingual personnel. In longitudinal analysis, respondents were increasingly motivated over time to overcome barriers to accessing vaccines (61.4% to 69.6%, p = <.001). Fifty-nine percent (59.9%) of respondents would accept annual vaccination and over half would accept co-administration with routine (56.2%) or influenza (52.3%) vaccines. Experiences of racism/discrimination upon health service access were reported by 12.3% of respondents, who recommended increasing culturally safe practices and community involvement at vaccination sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding how newcomers, racialized peoples, and minority language speakers perceive and access COVID-19 vaccines will support vaccination campaigns to optimize equitable access.

Ingroup Favoritism Surrounding COVID-19 Vaccinations in the Hispanic Communities: Experimental Study

BACKGROUND

Hispanic communities have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to elevated health risks and burdens, these populations have faced persistent barriers to accessing accurate, timely information regarding the pandemic's trajectory, including vaccine-related updates. To address these challenges, it is crucial to examine the conditions under which Hispanics are most likely to seek information about COVID-19 vaccinations.

OBJECTIVE

Grounded in social identity theory and self-categorization theory, the primary goal of this study is to investigate how ethnic and linguistic cues influence information-seeking preferences related to COVID-19 vaccinations among Hispanic individuals. The first aim is to compare Hispanic and non-Hispanic participants in terms of their preferences for COVID-19 vaccine-related social media pages, in which the ethnicity of individuals shown in the images (Hispanic vs non-Hispanic) and the language in the text (Spanish vs English) vary. The second aim is to identify which combination of ethnic imagery and language in the text is most preferred among Hispanic participants when seeking COVID-19 vaccination information.

METHODS

A total of 936 participants (Hispanic: n=448; non-Hispanic: n=488) were included in the study. We created experimental social media group pages modeled after Facebook groups, in which the ethnicity of individuals shown in the imagery and the language used in the text were manipulated. A total of 4 conditions were developed: (1) Hispanic imagery with Spanish text, (2) non-Hispanic imagery with Spanish text, (3) Hispanic imagery with English text, and (4) non-Hispanic imagery with English text. Participants were asked to indicate the extent to which they would be willing to seek help from each social media group page, under the assumption that they were looking for information or assistance related to the COVID-19 vaccine, regardless of their actual vaccination status. A between-subjects ANOVA and a one-way repeated-measures ANOVA were conducted to analyze the data.

RESULTS

The findings indicated that Hispanic participants significantly preferred social media pages featuring Hispanic imagery and Spanish text compared to non-Hispanic participants. Moreover, a page with non-Hispanic imagery and English text was less preferred by Hispanic than by non-Hispanic individuals. Among Hispanic participants, the condition featuring Hispanic imagery and Spanish text emerged as the most favored, particularly when compared to conditions featuring non-Hispanic imagery paired with either Spanish or English text. Notably, there was no significant difference between the preference for the condition with Hispanic imagery and Spanish text and the condition with Hispanic imagery and English text, suggesting that imagery may have a stronger influence than language in shaping preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that incorporating ethnic and language cues that reflect the target audience's identity can enhance the effectiveness of public health messaging, particularly in efforts to improve information engagement among Hispanic populations.

A comprehensive analysis of COVID-19 vaccination behavior: The influence of religion, information sources, political leanings, and demographic factors

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the crucial role of vaccines in controlling the virus. Despite their effectiveness, however, vaccine hesitancy remained a challenge, particularly within certain population groups. This multi-disciplinary study investigates the diverse socio-demographic factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination decisions in the United States. Through a nationally representative survey of 5,240 people, the research explores the interplay of information sources, religious beliefs, political party, and demographic characteristics of the respondents. Our findings reveal associations of main sources of information with vaccination likelihood, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention demonstrating the highest association with full vaccination. Religious beliefs are significant determinants, with Evangelical Protestants exhibiting the lowest vaccination rates. We also highlight the intricate relationship between political leanings and vaccination behavior, emphasizing higher levels of vaccination among Democrats. Demographic variables, including age, education, gender, and race/ethnicity, also play pivotal roles, exposing disparities in vaccination access and decisions. In particular, older individuals and those with higher levels of education show a greater inclination to achieve full vaccination, while women and African Americans are less likely to attain complete vaccination. Lastly, while major ethnoracial groups seem to respond to different sources of information similarly, there are also nuanced differences, such as Asians being especially likely to be fully vaccinated if they depend on the CDC or other health sources while more disadvantaged groups seem less responsive to these sources. Overall, this research provides a comprehensive analysis of the nuanced factors shaping vaccination behavior. It contributes valuable knowledge to public health strategies, emphasizing the need for targeted communication campaigns tailored to diverse communities.

Newness, unfamiliarity, and cultural beliefs; social and behavioural barriers to COVID-19 vaccination among the Dumagat Remontado, an Indigenous population in the Philippines

Indigenous Peoples faced unique challenges that contributed to vaccine hesitancy, including limited healthcare access, mistrust of medical institutions, and adherence to traditional practices. While vaccination played a critical role in improving public health, Indigenous communities often remained underserved and sceptical about its benefits, particularly in the context of COVID-19. Thus, this study aimed to explore the perceptions and experiences of the Dumagat Remontado, an Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines, on COVID-19 vaccination. Through their narratives, the study aimed to identify the factors that affect their intention to get vaccinated and uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. A qualitative research design was employed, with in-depth interviews conducted with 18 respondents in Rizal, Philippines in January 2023 and the Framework Approach used for data analysis. Findings were presented within the World Health Organization's Behavioural and Social Drivers (BeSD) framework for vaccination. Key factors influencing vaccine intention included government policies, social norms, perceived disease severity, susceptibility, and vaccine benefits and risks. Health experts and vaccinated individuals were identified as the most favoured sources of vaccine information. Accessibility of services, healthcare worker demeanour, and information availability surfaced as practical issues which hindered vaccine uptake. The study underscored the importance of involving the Dumagat Remontado in conceptualising and implementing vaccination programmes, as well as utilising vaccine champions, real-life narratives, and the local language in information dissemination. These contributions emphasised the need for inclusive public health strategies to address vaccine hesitancy among Indigenous Peoples, ultimately promoting equitable access to healthcare and improving vaccination rates.

COVID-19 vaccination knowledge, attitudes, and practices within a majority Hispanic/Latino pediatric healthcare system

PURPOSE

Early COVID-19 vaccine uptake remains unexplored among Hispanic/Latino pediatric healthcare workers (HCWs). This study examined COVID-19 vaccination knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) among a sample of predominantly Hispanic/Latino pediatric HCWs.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Employees in a pediatric health system completed an online KAP survey May 3-July 31, 2021 (n = 643, 59 % Hispanic/Latino). A cross-sectional descriptive survey design was used to capture perceptions and behaviors regarding COVID-19 vaccination. A Firth corrected logistic regression was conducted to identify significant predictors of COVID-19 vaccination.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight percent of the sample reported they were willing or already vaccinated for COVID-19, 12 % reported vaccine hesitancy. Within our Hispanic/Latino subsample, 86 % were vaccine willing or vaccinated. Significant predictors of COVID-19 vaccination included age, considering COVID-19 a threat to U.S. health, no previous COVID-19 infection, flu vaccination, attitude that vaccines are safe, and job role. COVID-19 information sources varied between groups. Race/ethnicity did not predict vaccination. Vaccine-hesitant participants reported concerns related to long-term health effects, vaccine distrust, and fertility.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccine acceptance was generally supported within our sample. Race/ethnicity did not predict vaccine hesitancy within our majority Hispanic/Latino sample. A subset of participants did report vaccine hesitancy however, with concerns including long-term health effects, vaccine distrust, and fertility.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Pediatric nurses can serve as a barometer for public opinion on vaccination and may serve as a trusted source of health information for racially and ethnically diverse communities. Understanding nurses' attitudes and opinions related to vaccination is recommended as part of public messaging for future immunization campaigns.

Respiratory syncytial virus vaccine uptake among adults aged ≥60 years in a large, integrated healthcare system in Southern California 2023-2024

During the 2023-2024 respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) season, vaccination was recommended for adults ≥60 years based on shared clinical decision-making with their healthcare providers. We examined RSV vaccine uptake and characteristics associated with uptake among age-eligible Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) patients. Our study cohort included all patients ≥60 years from September 23, 2023 (i.e., date RSV vaccination first became available at KPSC; N = 1,003,132) to April 9, 2024 (i.e., end of local RSV season). To identify sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with RSV vaccination, we used multivariable robust Poisson regression to estimate the adjusted relative risk (aRR) and 95 % CI. Overall, 7.6 % of patients were vaccinated for RSV. In multivariable regression analyses, those aged 70-79.9 years (aRR: 1.36; 95 % CI: 1.34-1.39) and aged ≥80 years (aRR: 1.35; 95 % CI: 1.32-1.38) were more likely to be vaccinated, compared with those aged 60-69.9 years. Compared with Non-Hispanic White patients, Asian (aRR: 0.95; 95 % CI: 0.93-0.97), Hispanic (aRR: 0.52; 95 % CI: 0.51-0.54), Non-Hispanic Black (aRR: 0.69; 95 % CI: 0.67-0.71), Pacific Islander (aRR: 0.91; 95 % CI: 0.84-0.98), and Native American or Alaska Native (aRR: 0.80; 95 % CI: 0.70-0.92) patients were less likely to be vaccinated. Those in higher neighborhood deprivation quartiles were less likely to be vaccinated (Q2: aRR: 0.86; 95 % CI: 0.85-0.88; Q3: aRR: 0.77; 95 % CI: 0.76-0.79; and Q4: aRR: 0.67; 95 % CI: 0.65-0.68), compared with those in the lowest deprivation quartile. We found low vaccination uptake and identified disparities in vaccination that might exacerbate existing disparities in RSV infection and severe RSV disease among certain populations. CDC's ACIP recently updated their recommendations for all adults 75+ years, and this might begin to address these disparities.

Global spatio-temporal distribution of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine hesitancy between 2020 and 2022: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Vaccine hesitancy is a major barrier to high coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine coverage. To synthesize global research on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, a meta-analysis was conducted to provide scientific evidence for understanding its spatial and temporal variations and influencing factors.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases for studies published in English between January 2020 and December 2023 and included cross-sectional and cohort studies with study populations that included the general adult population aged ≥18 years and provided quantitative data on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance or hesitancy. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis elements and guidance for abstracting and assessing data quality and validity. Two groups of investigators independently extracted the study characteristics, including the outcome variable (the vaccine hesitancy rate). Our meta-analysis used a random-effects model. The outcome of interest was COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The included studies were divided into two categories based on their definitions of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Definition 1 combined vaccination behavior and willingness, and Definition 2 was based solely on willingness to vaccinate.

RESULTS

855 studies were included in the final analytical dataset; 121 met Definition 1, and 734 met Definition 2. There were 277,285,178 participants in the included studies. In studies meeting Definition 1, hesitancy rates increased annually: 18.8 % in 2020, 29.1 % in 2021, and 30.8 % in 2022. However, in studies that met Definition 2, the hesitancy rates remained at 35 %. African studies reported the highest hesitancy rates globally (42.0 %), whereas European studies reported the lowest (16.5 %). Furthermore, there was a temporal association between mortality trends and COVID-19 hesitancy because the monthly cumulative death peaks coincided with lower hesitancy peaks.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy increased across the continent during 2020-2022 and might be influenced by misinformation, policy changes, and public fatigue. Demographic factors like age, gender, and education also play a key role in vaccine hesitancy. The link between vaccine hesitancy and pandemic severity highlights the need for timely and effective public health responses.

Racial Disparities in Hesitancy and Utilization of Monoclonal Antibody Infusion Treatment of COVID-19: Lessons for Future Pandemics

BACKGROUND AND METHODS

We conducted a single-center cross-sectional study to investigate racial disparities in the hesitancy and utilization of monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment of COVID-19 among treatment eligible patients who were referred to the infusion center between January 4, 2021, and May 14, 2021.

RESULTS

Among the 2406 eligible participants, mAb treatment was significantly underutilized among African American patients compared to White patients (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.5-2.1). The higher proportion of refusals and cancellations of mAb treatment may suggest a higher level of hesitancy among African American patients (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.3-2.1).

CONCLUSION

Evaluating the reasons and addressing racial disparities in hesitancy of novel therapeutics under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) offer a critical opportunity to address the inequities in pandemic care.

Global burden of vaccine-associated kidney injury using an international pharmacovigilance database

Global evidence on the association between vaccines and renal adverse events (AEs) is inconclusive. This pharmacovigilance study analyzed a total of 120,715,116 reports from VigiBase collected between 1967 and 2022. We evaluated the global reporting of acute kidney injury (AKI), glomerulonephritis (GN), and tubulointerstitial nephritis (TIN) and assessed disproportionate signals between vaccines and renal AEs using reporting odds ratios (ROR) and the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of the information component (IC025) in comparison with the entire database. The number and proportion of reports on AKI, GN, and TIN gradually increased, with a substantial increase after 2020. Disproportionate reporting of AKI was significant for COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (ROR, 2.38; IC025, 1.09). Fourteen vaccines were significantly disproportionate for higher GN reporting, and the highest disproportionality for GN reporting was observed for COVID-19 mRNA (ROR, 13.41; IC025, 2.90) and hepatitis B vaccines (ROR, 11.35; IC025, 3.18). Disproportionate TIN reporting was significant for COVID-19 mRNA (ROR, 2.43; IC025, 0.99) and human papillomavirus (ROR, 1.75; IC025, 0.19) vaccines. Significant disproportionality in the reporting of AKI, GN, and TIN was observed in patients exposed to multiple vaccines, including COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, alongside increasing global reports of vaccine-associated renal AEs.

Medical mistrust and vaccine-hesitant attitudes explain SARS-CoV-2 vaccination disparities in a mixed serostatus cohort

OBJECTIVES

To understand the extent of racial disparities in SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among PWH and those vulnerable to HIV infection and to estimate the contributions of medical mistrust and vaccine-hesitant attitudes to these disparities.

DESIGN

Quantitative data analyses in a racially and gender-diverse, mixed-serostatus prospective cohort, the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS)/Women's Interagency HIV Study (WIHS) Combined Cohort Study.

METHODS

Interviewer-assisted questionnaires assessed SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, medical mistrust, and vaccine-hesitant attitudes from March 2021 to September 2022 ( n  = 3948). Longitudinal analyses assessed effects of sociodemographics on medical mistrust and vaccine-hesitant attitudes. A hierarchical multivariable logistic regression assessed effects of these co-factors on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Causal mediation models assessed whether medical mistrust mediated the relationship between Black identity and vaccine-hesitant attitudes, and vaccine-hesitant attitudes mediated the relationship between Black identity and SARS-CoV-2 nonvaccination.

RESULTS

Participants' mean age was 56.7; 55.3% were Black, 52.6% cisgender female, 62.6% PWH. 10.1% reported never receiving SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations (13.4% of Black and 4.5% of White participants). Black-identified participants had higher odds of nonvaccination than White participants [aOR = 1.72; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-2.72]. Medical mistrust mediated the relationship between Black identity and vaccine-hesitant attitudes, accounting for 46% of the effect ( P  < 0.0001). Vaccine-hesitant attitudes mediated the relationship between Black identity and SARS-CoV-2 nonvaccination to the extent that 57.7% (95% CI 25.3-90.1%) of the disparity would be eliminated if vaccine-hesitant attitudes among Black respondents were reduced to levels reported among other racial groups.

CONCLUSION

Findings indicate a profound need to build trustworthy healthcare environments to combat medical mistrust and vaccine-hesitant attitudes in Black communities in the United States, including those affected by HIV.

Intersecting factors of disadvantage and discrimination and their effect on daily life during the coronavirus pandemic: the CICADA-ME mixed-methods study

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated pre-existing societal inequities. Our study addresses the dearth of studies on how intersecting factors of disadvantage and discrimination affected pandemic daily life for disabled people from minoritised ethnic groups, aiming to improve their experiences and social, health and well-being outcomes.

Objectives

Through an intersectionality lens, to: explore and compare, by location and time, survey and qualitative data on changing needs for social, health and well-being outcomes relate coping strategies/solutions to these explore formal and informal network issues/affordances gain insights from synthesising our data contextualise and explore transferability of findings co-create outputs with stakeholders.

Design

Mixed-methods, asset-based, underpinned by embodiment disability models and intersectionality, integrating three strands: (secondary): analysis of existing cohort/panel data, literature review (primary: quantitative): new survey (n = 4326), three times over 18 months (primary: qualitative): semistructured interviews (n = 271), interviewee co-create workshops (n = 104) 5 and 10 months later, mixed stakeholder co-design workshops (n = 30) for rapid-impact solutions to issues, key informant interviews (n = 4).

Setting

United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland.

Participants

Strand 2: community-dwelling migrants, White British comparators, with/without disability. Strand 3: focus on Arab, South Asian, African, Central/East European, or White British heritage with/without disability.

Results

We found strong adherence to pandemic restrictions (where accommodation, economic situations and disability allowed) due to COVID-19 vulnerabilities. High vaccine hesitancy (despite eventual uptake) resulted from side-effect concerns and (mis)trust in the government. Many relied on food banks, local organisations, communities and informal networks. Pandemic-related income loss was common, particularly affecting undocumented migrants. Participants reported a crisis in mental health care, non-holistic social and housing care, and inaccessible, poor-quality and discriminatory remote health/social care. They preferred private care (which they could not easily afford), community or self-help online support. Lower socioeconomic status, mental health and mobility issues reduced well-being. Individual and community assets and coping strategies mitigated some issues, adapted over different pandemic phases, and focused on empowerment, self-reflection, self-care and social connectivity. Technology needs cut across these.

Limitations

We could not explore area-level social distancing and infection rates. Data collection was largely online, possibly excluding some older, digitally deprived or more disabled participants. Participants engaged differently in online and face-to-face co-create workshops. Our qualitative data over-represent England and South Asian people and use contestable categories.

Conclusions

Different intersecting factors led to different experiences, with low socioeconomic status particularly significant. Overall, disability and minoritised ethnic identities led to worse pandemic experiences. Our co-design work shows how to build on the assets and strengths; simple changes in professional communication and understanding should improve experience. Minoritised groups can easily be involved in policy and practice decision-making, reducing marginalisation, with better сare and outcomes.

Future work

More research is needed on: (1) the impact of the post-pandemic economic situation and migration policies on migrant mental health/well-being; (2) supporting empowerment strategies across disadvantaged intersecting identities; and (3) technological deprivation and the cultural and disability-relevant acceptability of remote consultations. We found some differences in the devolved nations, which need elucidation.

Study registration

This study is registered as ISRCTN40370, PROSPERO CRD42021262590 and CRD42022355254.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132914) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 13, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Vaccine hesitancy or hesitancies? A latent class analysis of pediatric patients' parents

Vaccine hesitancy is an attitude of indecision toward vaccination that is related to but not determinative of vaccination behaviors. Although theories of vaccine hesitancy emphasize it is often vaccine-specific, we do not know the extent to which this is true across sociodemographic groups. In this study, we asked: What latent classes of vaccine hesitancy might exist when examining parents' attitudes toward vaccines in general and COVID-19 and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination specifically? Which sociodemographic, health access, and health-related variables are predictive of membership in those classes? To answer those questions, we analyze online survey data from parents of pediatric patients recruited through eight clinics within the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Rural Research Network. Data were collected between September 16, 2022 and December 6, 2022. Latent class analysis revealed three underlying classes of vaccine hesitancy, or hesitancies: The "Selectively Hesitant," the "COVID-Centric Hesitant," and the "Pervasively Hesitant." Significant predictors of class membership were age, education, health insurance status, and usual source of care. Vaccine hesitancy may be specific to certain vaccines for some parents and more generalized for others. The distinct classes of vaccine hesitancy revealed in this study suggest the need for distinct approaches to addressing vaccine hesitancy depending on the population.

"Going vaccine hunting": Multilevel influences on COVID-19 vaccination among racialized sexual and gender minority adults-a qualitative study

High levels of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy have been reported among Black and Latinx populations, with lower vaccination coverage among racialized versus White sexual and gender minorities. We examined multilevel contexts that influence COVID-19 vaccine uptake, barriers to vaccination, and vaccine hesitancy among predominantly racialized sexual and gender minority individuals. Semi-structured online interviews explored perspectives and experiences around COVID-19 vaccination. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, uploaded into ATLAS.ti, and reviewed using thematic analysis. Among 40 participants (mean age, 29.0 years [SD, 9.6]), all identified as sexual and/or gender minority, 82.5% of whom were racialized. COVID-19 vaccination experiences were dominated by structural barriers: systemic racism, transphobia and homophobia in healthcare and government/public health institutions; limited availability of vaccination/appointments in vulnerable neighborhoods; absence of culturally-tailored and multi-language information; lack of digital/internet access; and prohibitive indirect costs of vaccination. Vaccine hesitancy reflected in uncertainties about a novel vaccine amid conflicting information and institutional mistrust was integrally linked to structural factors. Findings suggest that the uncritical application of "vaccine hesitancy" to unilaterally explain undervaccination among marginalized populations risks conflating structural and institutional barriers with individual-level psychological factors, in effect placing the onus on those most disenfranchised to overcome societal and institutional processes of marginalization. Rather, disaggregating structural determinants of vaccination availability, access, and institutional stigma and mistrust from individual attitudes and decision-making that reflect vaccine hesitancy, may support 1) evidence-informed interventions to mitigate structural barriers in access to vaccination, and 2) culturally-informed approaches to address decisional ambivalence in the context of structural homophobia, transphobia, and racism.

COVID-Related Discrimination and Health Care Access among a Nationally Representative, Diverse Sample of US Adults

BACKGROUND

In the United States, COVID-related discrimination towards racial and ethnic minority populations is well documented; however, its impact on healthcare access during the pandemic has not been assessed.

METHODS

We used data from our nationally representative, online survey of 5,500 American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN), Asian, Black, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Latino, White, and multiracial adults conducted between 12/2020-2/2021 (baseline) and 8/2021-9/2021 (6-month follow-up; 35.1% response rate). At baseline, participants were asked how often they experienced discriminatory behaviors "because they think you might have COVID-19" (modified Everyday Discrimination Scale). Participants were asked if they were unable to get needed health care (e.g., cancer screening), or COVID-19 testing at both time-points. Vaccine willingness was assessed at baseline and uptake at follow-up.

RESULTS

Experiencing COVID-related discrimination was associated with not being able to get health care at baseline (OR = 3.66, 95% CI = 2.91-4.59) and follow-up (OR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.16-2.97) and not being able to get a COVID-19 test at baseline (OR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.68-2.65) and follow-up (OR = 4.12, 95% CI = 2.20-7.72). Experiencing discrimination was also associated with being less likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccine (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.30-0.90), despite individuals who experienced discrimination being more willing to vaccinate at baseline (OR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.10-2.22).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-related discrimination was associated with an increased likelihood of being unable to get health care across all racial and ethnic populations, although associations were strongest among Asian, AIAN, and Latino adults. Healthcare providers should be aware of the impact of discrimination on healthcare utilization, delays, and health-seeking behaviors, especially among racial and ethnic minorities.

Rates and Factors Related to COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Racialized and Indigenous Individuals in Canada: The Deleterious Effect of Experience of Racial Discrimination

Racialized and Indigenous communities have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 infections and mortality, driven by systemic socioeconomic inequalities. However, how these factors specifically influence COVID-19 vaccine uptake is not documented among racialized individuals in Canada. The present study aims to examine COVID-19 vaccine uptake rates and related factors among racialized and Indigenous communities compared to White people in Canada. In total, 41,931 individuals aged 16 and older, consisting mainly of Arab, Asian, Black, Indigenous, and White individuals, were randomly invited to participate from a panel of 420,000 Canadian households. A total of 4220 participants completed this cross-sectional survey study in October 2023. In total, 89.60% of participants were vaccinated: 2.38% received one dose, 31.45% received two doses, 33.46% received three doses, 18.86% received four doses, and 13.86% received five doses and more. There were significant differences according to racial and ethnic background in vaccine uptake (χ2 = 57.45, p < 0.001), with Indigenous and Black individuals having lower vaccination rates (83.54%, OR = 1.98% and 84.76%, OR = 2.16, p < 0.01) compared to White individuals (91.66%). Confidence in health authorities was positively associated with vaccine uptake (B = 0.62, p < 0.001). Conspiracy beliefs partially mediated this association (B = -0.13, p < 0.001). Racial discrimination attenuated vaccine uptake, even if respondents had confidence in health authorities (B = -0.08, p < 0.001). Vaccine uptake was lowest amongst Indigenous and Black communities, placing them at higher risk of severe COVID-19 infection. In addition to mistrust of public health authorities due to racism, racialized communities are affected by conspiracy beliefs that hinder COVID-19 vaccine uptake. A whole-of-society approach to address barriers to vaccine uptake among racialized populations, including wage disparities, racial discrimination, is needed to eliminate racial health disparities and increase vaccination rates in racialized communities.

Intersectionality of sex and race in COVID-19 mortality and vaccination inequities in Massachusetts

BACKGROUND

Inequities in COVID-19 incidence, morbidity, and mortality between racial and ethnic groups in the United States (U.S.) have been documented since the start of the pandemic in early 2020. Similarly, disparities by sex for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality have emerged, with men dying at a higher rate than women. Little research has been done to understand how the intersection of sex and race impacts COVID-19 inequities in Massachusetts (MA). This cross-sectional study examined how COVID-19 mortality rates (February 2020- May 2023) and vaccination rates (December 2020-February 2023) varied by sex across racial groups in MA.

METHODS

Using Massachusetts Department of Public Health data of all COVID-19 mortality cases and primary series vaccinations in MA from 2020 to 2023, we calculated both age-specific and age-adjusted COVID-19 mortality rates in order to account for differences in age distributions across sex-race groups.

RESULTS

Overall, men across all age-race groups consistently had a higher mortality rate compared to their female counterparts. The age-standardized mortality rate difference between White men and White women is the smallest, with the rate for White men being 1.3 times higher than White women. The age-standardized mortality rate between Hispanic men and Hispanic women varies the largest, with the rate for Hispanic men being 1.7 times higher than Hispanic women. Notably, Black women and White women have similar vaccination rates, yet the age-standardized mortality rate for Black women is 1.4 times the rate of White women.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that there are disparities at the intersection of sex and race for COVID-19 mortality and vaccination in MA. This highlights the importance for targeted COVID-19 interventions at the intersection of sex and race and the need for detailed COVID-19 reporting by sex within race groups.

Factors predicting primary and booster COVID-19 vaccination in a community sample of African American men and women in the United States Midwest

COVID-19 has disproportionately burdened impoverished minority communities. This study recruited an age- and gender-diverse community sample of 541 Black adults in a United States Midwestern city with large racial health disparities, with the aim of examining factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination. All participants completed measures assessing their COVID-19 vaccination status (unvaccinated, received primary vaccination, or received primary plus booster vaccination) as well as demographic characteristics, socioeconomic factors, health and health system factors, and health behavior theory constructs related to vaccination. In this predominantly low-income sample, 55% of participants had received primary COVID-19 vaccination and 31% of the sample had received a booster dose. Multiple regression analyses established that having primary vaccination was significantly predicted by older age, political identification as Democrat, education beyond high school, barriers to accessing health care, as well as higher trust of vaccine benefits, less preference for natural immunity, stronger social norms favoring vaccination, and perceiving higher levels of collective responsibility. Surprisingly, higher global medical mistrust and difficulty with healthcare access were associated with vaccination. The model explained 76% of the variance in primary COVID-19 vaccination. Having received a COVID-19 booster was predicted by older age, previous COVID-19 infection, higher trust in vaccine benefits, and fewer worries about unforeseen future effects of vaccination. Study findings identified factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake in racial minority communities, and support the benefits of interventions that harness social network supports for vaccination, address community vaccine concerns, and appeal to collective responsibility to promote vaccine uptake.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake among populations in the West department of Haiti

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic in Haiti led to increased challenges for a population concurrently dealing with natural and social disasters, poor quality health care, lack of clean running water, and inadequate housing. In 2022, the population of Haiti was 11.4 million. While half a million vaccines for COVID-19 were donated by the United States to the government of Haiti, less than 5% of the population agreed to be vaccinated. This resulted in thousands of unused doses that were diverted to other countries. The purpose of this study was to evaluate population characteristics related to vaccine uptake in order to inform future interventions to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake as well as inform strategies to safeguard against future global health security threats.

METHODS

This was a mixed-methods, cross-sectional study conducted in the West Department of Haiti within peri-urban communes. Participants consisted of adults in this setting responding to a survey from June 15 to July 18, 2022. The survey assessed demographic information, household characteristics, religious beliefs, past vaccine use, and current COVID-19 vaccine status. Multivariate regression modeling was conducted to assess predictors of vaccine hesitancy. Qualitative focus group discussion participants were recruited and focus group discussions were conducted between August-September 2022 among community groups, religious leaders and health professionals to provide additional, community-level context on perceptions of the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines.

RESULTS

A total of 1,923 respondents completed the survey; of which a majority were male (52.7%), between the age of 18-35 (58.5%), had a medical visit within the last year (63.0%) and received the COVID-19 vaccine (46.1%). Compared to those who had been COVID-19 vaccinated, participants who had not been vaccinated were more likely to be male (57.7% vs 46.8%, p < .0001), have completed secondary education (30.5% vs 16.6%, p < .001), unemployed (20.3% vs 7.3%, p < .0001) and had a medical visit 3 or more years ago (30.2% vs 11.2%, p < .0001). Unvaccinated COVID-19 participants were also more likely to have never received any other vaccine (36.1% vs22.5%, p < .0001), have a religious leader speak out against the vaccine (20.0% vs 13.1%, p < .0001), not believe in the effectiveness of the vaccine (51.2% vs 9.1%, p < .0001) and did not trust the healthcare worker administering the vaccine (35.2% vs 3.8%, p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

These results show that targeted interventions to religious leaders and health care workers on how to engage with the community and share clearer messages around the COVID-19 vaccination may result in increased vaccine uptake. Results also shed light on how activities surrounding vaccinations can be tailored to meet client needs addressing the misinformation encountered to achieve greater health impact thereby safeguarding the population against future global health security threats.

Racial disparities in Phase 1 COVID-19 vaccine shipments to Neighborhood sites in Pennsylvania by the Federal Retail Pharmacy Program

Early racial disparities in COVID-19 vaccination rates have been attributed primarily to personal vaccine attitudes and behavior. Little attention has been paid to the possibility that inequitable vaccine distribution may have contributed to racial disparities in vaccine uptake when supplies were most scarce. We test the hypothesis that scarce vaccines were distributed inequitably using the shipping addresses of 385,930 COVID-19 vaccine doses distributed in the first 17 weeks of Pennsylvania's Phase 1 rollout (December 14, 2020 through April 12, 2021). All shipments we analyze were allocated via the Federal Retail Pharmacy Program, a public-private partnership coordinated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Overall, White people had an average of 81.4% more retail pharmacy program doses shipped to their neighborhoods than did Black people. Regression models reveal that weekly vaccine allocations determined by pharmacy chains-rather than initial shipment and administration site decisions requiring state and federal approval-drove these effects. All findings remained consistent after controlling for neighborhood differences in income, population density, insurance coverage, number of pharmacies, and other social determinants of health.Our findings suggest that the private distribution of scarce public resources should be assessed for racial impact, regulated as public resources, and monitored continuously.

Neurological Events Following COVID-19 Vaccination: Does Ethnicity Matter?

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada between December 1, 2020 and June 31, 2021 to compare the incidence of neurological events (hospitalization or emergency room visit) within six weeks of COVID-19 vaccination in Chinese, South Asian and Other ethnic groups. Compared to Others, the crude rates after the first dose for Bell's palsy, ischemic stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage were lower in Chinese (34, 159 and 48 per 1,000,000 doses) and in South Asians (44, 148 and 32), but similar after adjusting for age, sex and vaccine type. Our findings should help encourage vaccination for all, irrespective of ethnicity.

Connect, collaborate and tailor: a model of community engagement through infographic design during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Across the globe, racial and ethnic minorities have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 with increased risk of infection and burden from disease. Vaccine hesitancy has contributed to variation in vaccine uptake and compromised population-based vaccination programs in many countries. Connect, Collaborate and Tailor (CCT) is a Public Health Agency of Canada funded project to make new connections between public health, healthcare professionals and underserved communities in order to create culturally adapted communication about COVID-19 vaccines. This paper describes the CCT process and outcomes as a community engagement model that identified information gaps and created tailored tools to address misinformation and improve vaccine acceptance.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with CCT participants were undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of CCT in identifying and addressing topics of concern to underserved and ethnic minority communities. Interviews also explored CCT participants' experiences of collaboration through the development of new partnerships between ethnic minority communities, public health and academic researchers, and the evolution of co-operation sharing ideas and creating infographics. Thematic analysis was used to produce representative themes. The activities described were aligned with the levels of public engagement described in the IAP2 spectrum (International Association for Public Participation).

RESULTS

Analysis of interviews (n = 14) revealed that shared purpose and urgency in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic motivated co-operation among CCT participants. Acknowledgement of past harm, present health, and impact of social inequities on public service access was an essential first step in establishing trust. Creating safe spaces for open dialogue led to successful, iterative cycles of consultation and feedback between participants; a process that not only helped create tailored infographics but also deepened engagement and collaboration. Over time, the infographic material development was increasingly directed by community representatives' commentary on their groups' real-time needs and communication preferences. This feedback noticeably guided the choice, style, and presentation of infographic content while also directing dissemination strategies and vaccine confidence building activities.

CONCLUSIONS

The CCT process to create COVID-19 vaccine communication materials led to evolving co-operation between groups who had not routinely worked together before; strong community engagement was a key driver of change. Ensuring a respectful environment for open dialogue and visibly using feedback to create information products provided a foundation for building relationships. Finally, our data indicate participants sought reinforcement of close cooperative ties and continued investment in shared responsibility for community partnership-based public health.

Cooperating Graph Neural Networks With Deep Reinforcement Learning for Vaccine Prioritization

This study explores the vaccine prioritization strategy to reduce the overall burden of the pandemic when the supply is limited. Existing vaccine distribution methods focus on macro-level or simplified micro-level assuming homogeneous behavior within populations without considering mobility patterns. Directly applying these models for micro-level vaccine allocation leads to sub-optimal solutions. To address the issue, we first proposed a Trans-vaccine-SEIR model to incorporate mobility heterogeneity in disease propagation. Then we develop a novel deep reinforcement learning to seek the optimal vaccine allocation strategy for the disease evolution system. The graph neural network is used to effectively capture the structural properties of the mobility network and extract disease features. In our evaluation, the proposed framework reduces 7%-10% of infections and deaths compared to the baseline strategies. Extensive evaluation shows that the proposed framework is robust to seek the optimal vaccine allocation with diverse mobility patterns. In particular, we find transit usage restriction is significantly more effective than restricting cross-zone mobility for the top 10% age-based and income-based zones under optimal vaccine allocation strategy. These results provide valuable insights for areas with limited vaccines and low logistic efficacy.

Benefit-Cost Analysis of the HHS COVID-19 Campaign: April 2021-March 2022

INTRODUCTION

This study estimated the benefits and costs of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' We Can Do This COVID-19 public education campaign (the Campaign) and associated vaccination-related impacts.

METHODS

Weekly media market and national Campaign expenditures were used to estimate weekly first-dose vaccinations that would not have occurred absent the Campaign, weekly Campaign-attributed complete vaccinations, and corresponding COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths averted. Benefits were valued using estimated morbidity and mortality reductions and associated values of a statistical life and a statistical case. Costs were estimated using Campaign paid media expenditures and corresponding vaccination costs. The net Campaign and vaccination benefit and return on investment were calculated. Analyses were conducted from 2022 to 2024.

RESULTS

Between April 2021 and March 2022, an estimated 55.9 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines would not have been administered absent the Campaign. Campaign-attributed vaccinations resulted in 2,576,133 fewer mild COVID-19 cases, 243,979 fewer nonfatal COVID-19 hospitalizations, and 51,675 lives saved from COVID-19. The total Campaign benefit was $740.2 billion, and Campaign and vaccination costs totaled $8.3 billion, with net benefits of approximately $732.0 billion. For every $1 spent, the Campaign and corresponding vaccination costs resulted in benefits of approximately $89.54.

CONCLUSIONS

The We Can Do This COVID-19 public education campaign saved more than 50,000 lives and prevented hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations and millions of COVID-19 cases, representing hundreds of billions of dollars in benefits in less than one year. Findings suggest that public education campaigns are a cost-effective approach to reducing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.

Navigating vaccination choices: The intersecting dynamics of institutional trust, belonging and message perception among Congolese migrants in London, UK (a reflexive thematic analysis)

The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately impacted intersectionally marginalised migrants, revealing systemic disparities in health outcomes and vaccine uptake. Understanding the underlying social and structural factors influencing health behaviours is necessary to develop tailored interventions for migrants, but these factors have been seldom explored. This qualitative study aimed to explore contextual factors shaping COVID-19 vaccination decision-making among Congolese migrants in the UK.A community-based participatory research study was designed and led by a community-academic partnership in London, UK (2021-2022). Peer-led, semi-structured interviews were conducted in Lingala with 32 adult Congolese migrants and explored beliefs, perceptions and lived experiences of migration, healthcare, vaccination and the COVID-19 pandemic. Reflexive thematic analysis generated two themes and a model conceptualising the vaccination decision-making process. Participants and community partners were financially compensated; ethics was granted by the University of London ethics committee (REC: 2021.0128).Participants highlighted the incompatibility of lockdown restrictions with their communal culture, which intensified feelings of exclusion and alienation. Concerns about COVID-19 vaccination were attributed to safety and effectiveness, partly informed by experiences and legacies of racial discrimination and exploitation. Inequality in the pandemic response and COVID-19 outcomes heightened participants' sense that their views and needs were being overlooked, and government sources and information were perceived as coercive. Our model depicts the interplay between institutional trust, belonging, and message perception, which shaped participants' vaccination decisions and led to (non-)engagement with COVID-19 vaccination. This research enhances understanding of how social and contextual factors may influence migrants' engagement with health interventions. It underscores the importance of partnering with migrant communities to understand their needs in context and co-design tailored interventions and inclusive messaging strategies that promote trust and belonging. Implementing systemic changes to address structural inequalities will be crucial to create an environment that supports engagement with health-protective behaviours and enhances health outcomes among migrant communities.

Willingness to get vaccinated initially and yearly against COVID-19 and its association with vaccine hesitancy, vaccine knowledge and psychological well-being: a cross-sectional study in UK adults

OBJECTIVES

This study explores the association between vaccine hesitancy, vaccine knowledge and psychological well-being with (1) receipt of/willingness to receive an initial vaccine against COVID-19, and (2) willingness to get vaccinated yearly against COVID-19. The importance of different vaccine attributes (eg, vaccine technology, effectiveness, side effects) to choose a specific COVID-19 vaccine was also assessed.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey administered during May to June 2021 on vaccine hesitancy, vaccine knowledge, psychological well-being, willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccines, sociodemographics and COVID-19-related factors.

SETTING

UK.

PARTICIPANTS

A self-selected sample of 1408 adults.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Receipt of/willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine for the first time and yearly.

RESULTS

Receipt of/willingness to receive a vaccine against COVID-19 initially and yearly were high (97.0% and 86.6%, respectively). Vaccine hesitancy was negatively associated with receipt of/willingness to receive vaccine initially/yearly (adjusted OR (aOR)=0.09, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.26, p<0.001/aOR=0.05, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.09, p<0.001). Vaccine knowledge and psychological well-being were positively associated with willingness to receive a yearly vaccine (aOR=1.81, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.29, p<0.001 and aOR=1.25, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.51, p=0.014, respectively), and general vaccine knowledge also with receipt of/willingness to receive vaccine initially (aOR=1.69, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.42, p=0.004). Vaccine effectiveness was the most important attribute for participants to choose a specific COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Improving vaccine knowledge and emphasising vaccine efficacy may minimise vaccine hesitancy and increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

Rationing, Responsibility, and Vaccination during COVID-19: A Conceptual Map

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, shortages of scarce healthcare resources consistently presented significant moral and practical challenges. While the importance of vaccines as a key pharmaceutical intervention to stem pandemic scarcity was widely publicized, a sizable proportion of the population chose not to vaccinate. In response, some have defended the use of vaccination status as a criterion for the allocation of scarce medical resources. In this paper, we critically interpret this burgeoning literature, and describe a framework for thinking about vaccine-sensitive resource allocation using the values of responsibility, reciprocity, and justice. Although our aim here is not to defend a single view of vaccine-sensitive resource allocation, we believe that attending critically with the diversity of arguments in favor (and against) vaccine-sensitivity reveals a number of questions that a vaccine-sensitive approach to allocation should answer in future pandemics.

Social Determinants of Health and Satisfaction With Sources of Information About COVID-19 Related to Vaccine Uptake in a Safety Net Healthcare System

BACKGROUND

Vaccination is a critical tool to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, vaccine uptake varies across communities and is often affected by sociodemographic factors and accessibility.

OBJECTIVES

This article outlines a pilot study aimed to examine factors associated with COVID-19 patients within one of the nation's largest safety net healthcare systems.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey design was conducted with adults over 18 years of age eligible to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Descriptive analysis of survey data collected in 2021-2022 was employed. Unconditional and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between sociodemographics, social factors, and COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

RESULTS

Study participants ( N = 280) were a diverse patient population, primarily low-income and majority Hispanic/Latinx, with low education levels, but with a high level of COVID-19 vaccine uptake and a high rate of intent to vaccinate again. Approximately 22% report having unstable housing, and 46% experiencing food insecurity. Most trusted sources for COVID-19 data included mainstream media, including TV, radio, and newspapers, and friends, family, or other informal networks. We found that respondents who were satisfied or very satisfied with COVID-19 information received from healthcare providers or the government had higher odds of vaccine uptake rates.

DISCUSSION

These findings highlight the critical role of access to the COVID-19 vaccine and sources of information as an independent factor in COVID-19 vaccine uptake among patients within a safety net healthcare system. This study expands the literature on COVID-19 vaccine uptake, particularly in an underresourced region of the South Los Angeles community. Future research is needed to better understand the mechanisms between social determinants of health, perceived discrimination, and vaccine uptake.

Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of Three Outreach Events to Improve COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Among Racial and Ethnic Minority Communities in Houston, Texas, 2022

OBJECTIVES

Lack of access to timely, accurate, and linguistically appropriate COVID-19 information has complicated the dissemination of evidence-based information and contributed to vaccine hesitancy among racial and ethnic minority groups in the United States. We developed community events that provided outreach, education, and access to COVID-19 vaccination to overcome vaccine hesitancy in these communities.

METHODS

Using spatial analysis techniques, we identified 3 communities with low vaccine uptake in Houston, Texas, in fall 2021; engaged 20 stakeholders from these communities via 4 focus groups to understand barriers to vaccination; and developed and implemented 3 COVID-19 vaccine education and outreach events tailored to the needs of these communities in January-March 2022. We used program evaluation surveys to assess attendee characteristics and satisfaction with the events. Vaccinated attendees also completed surveys on what motivated them to get vaccinated.

RESULTS

Two communities were predominantly Hispanic, and the third had an equal number of Black and Hispanic residents. Based on community stakeholder input, the study team organized 2 health fairs and 1 community festival featuring dialogue-based COVID-19 vaccine engagement in January and March 2022. Across the 3 events, a total of 865 attendees received COVID-19 education and 205 (24.0%) attendees received a COVID-19 vaccine or booster. Of 90 attendees who completed program evaluation surveys, 81 (90%) rated the outreach event as good or excellent. Of 145 attendees who completed postvaccination surveys, 132 (91%) endorsed ≥1 key program feature as motivating them to either get vaccinated or vaccinate their child that day.

CONCLUSION

Community outreach events are important strategies for disseminating information, building trust, and facilitating COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

Association Between the United States Department of Health and Human Services' COVID-19 Public Education Campaign and Initial Adult COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake by Race and Ethnicity in the United States, 2020-2022

Non-Hispanic Black (Black) and Hispanic/Latino (Latino) populations face an increased risk of COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19 relative to non-Hispanic White (White) populations. When COVID-19 vaccines became available in December 2020, Black and Latino adults were less likely than White adults to get vaccinated due to factors such as racial discrimination and structural barriers to uptake. In April 2021, the U.S. HHS COVID-19 public education campaign (the Campaign) was launched to promote vaccination through general and audience-tailored messaging. As of March 2022, Black and Latino adults had reached parity with White adults in COVID-19 vaccine uptake. This study evaluated the relationship between Campaign exposure and subsequent vaccine uptake among Black, Latino, and White adults in the United States and assessed whether participant race/ethnicity moderated the relationship between Campaign exposure and vaccine uptake. Campaign media delivery data was merged with survey data collected from a sample of U.S. adults (n = 2,923) over four waves from January 2021 to March 2022. Logistic regression analysis showed that cumulative Campaign digital impressions had a positive, statistically significant association with COVID-19 vaccine uptake, and that participant race/ethnicity moderated this association. Compared with White adults, the magnitude of the relationship between cumulative impressions and vaccination was greater among Black and Latino adults. Results from a simulation model suggested that the Campaign may have been responsible for closing 5.0% of the gap in COVID-19 vaccination by race/ethnicity from April to mid-September 2021. We discuss implications for future public education campaigns that aim to reduce health disparities.

Increased disease severity during COVID-19 related hospitalization in black non-hispanic, hispanic and medicaid-insured young children

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected marginalized groups in the United States. Although most children have mild or asymptomatic COVID-19, some experience severe disease and long-term complications. However, few studies have examined health disparities in severe COVID-19 outcomes among US children.

Objective

To examine disparities in the clinical outcomes of infants and children aged <5 years hospitalized with COVID-19 by race/ethnicity and payer status.

Methods

Children aged <5 years hospitalized with an admission diagnosis of COVID-19 (April 2021-February 2023) were selected from the PINC AI™ Healthcare Database. Hospital outcomes included length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, oxygen supplementation, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and prolonged duration of each outcome. Multivariable logistic regression models compared hospitalization outcomes by race/ethnicity and payer status.

Results

Among 10,190 children (mean age: 0.9 years, 56.5% male, 66.7% Medicaid-insured), race/ethnicity was distributed as follows: White non-Hispanic (35.1%), Hispanic (any or Unknown race; 28.3%), Black non-Hispanic (15.2%), Other race/ethnicity (8.9%) and Unknown (12.5%). Payer status varied by race/ethnicity. White non-Hispanic children had the highest proportion with commercial insurance (42.9%) while other racial/ethnic groups ranged between 13.8% to 26.1%. Black non-Hispanic children had the highest proportion with Medicaid (82.3%) followed by Hispanic children (76.9%). Black non-Hispanic children had higher odds of prolonged outcomes: LOS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.05-1.38), ICU days (aOR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.07-1.93), and IMV days (aOR = 1.80, 95% CI: 1.09-2.97) compared to White non-Hispanic children. Similar patterns were observed for Hispanic and children of Other race/ethnicity. Medicaid-insured and children with other insurance had higher odds of prolonged LOS and oxygen days than commercially insured patients.

Conclusion

There were disparities in clinical outcomes of COVID-19 by race/ethnicity and insurance type, particularly for prolonged-duration outcomes. Further research is required to fully comprehend the causes and consequences of these disparities and develop strategies to reduce them while ensuring equitable healthcare delivery.

Understanding the determinants of vaccine hesitancy in the United States: A comparison of social surveys and social media

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted governments worldwide to implement a range of containment measures, including mass gathering restrictions, social distancing, and school closures. Despite these efforts, vaccines continue to be the safest and most effective means of combating such viruses. Yet, vaccine hesitancy persists, posing a significant public health concern, particularly with the emergence of new COVID-19 variants. To effectively address this issue, timely data is crucial for understanding the various factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy. While previous research has largely relied on traditional surveys for this information, recent sources of data, such as social media, have gained attention. However, the potential of social media data as a reliable proxy for information on population hesitancy, especially when compared with survey data, remains underexplored. This paper aims to bridge this gap. Our approach uses social, demographic, and economic data to predict vaccine hesitancy levels in the ten most populous US metropolitan areas. We employ machine learning algorithms to compare a set of baseline models that contain only these variables with models that incorporate survey data and social media data separately. Our results show that XGBoost algorithm consistently outperforms Random Forest and Linear Regression, with marginal differences between Random Forest and XGBoost. This was especially the case with models that incorporate survey or social media data, thus highlighting the promise of the latter data as a complementary information source. Results also reveal variations in influential variables across the five hesitancy classes, such as age, ethnicity, occupation, and political inclination. Further, the application of models to different MSAs yields mixed results, emphasizing the uniqueness of communities and the need for complementary data approaches. In summary, this study underscores social media data's potential for understanding vaccine hesitancy, emphasizes the importance of tailoring interventions to specific communities, and suggests the value of combining different data sources.

The Impact of Racism on Healthcare Experiences and Well-Being: a Qualitative Study Based on Focus Group Discussions with Communities of Color

INTRODUCTION

Connections between race and health are discussed, and racism has been called out as a root cause of health disparities. The impacts of systemic racism are not fully understood and should be considered in order to advance health equity. The aim of the study is to explore the impact of racism on healthcare experiences and well-being for communities of color.

METHODS

Individuals from a Northeast region of Wisconsin, who self-identified as Somali, Hmong, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino/a, and First Nations/Native American/Indigenous, were invited to participate in focus group discussions, and informed consent was obtained from all participants (25 adults, 17 females, and 8 males). Focus groups were planned so participants from the same self-identified communities were together, and five virtual focus group discussions were carried out. A qualitative content analysis approach was used to gain a deeper understanding of the content.

RESULTS

There was a range of experiences; however, everyone experienced the negative impacts of racism. Three categories, representing areas impacted by racism, and a final theme, describing the overall impact on healthcare experiences and well-being, were created. Dealing with systemic racism means that "backgrounds and values," "resources," and "prejudices" (categories) require constant attention, maneuvering, and "juggling the impacts of racism diminishes access to healthcare and well-being for communities of color" (theme).

DISCUSSION

Systemic racism negatively impacts access to healthcare and well-being for communities of color perpetuating health disparities. Planning and policy should include a focus on health equity and target systemic racism in order to diminish health disparities.

A qualitative study evaluating COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among individuals living in Mississippi

Background

COVID-19 vaccination rates are lower in the Southern United States compared to other regions. This study investigated COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in Mississippi (MS) to identify preferences that may boost MS vaccination strategies in areas with poor vaccine uptake.

Methods

Qualitative interviews were completed between April 2021 and January 2022 with staff and patients at four Federally Qualified Health Centers in MS. Interviews included the following COVID-19 vaccine topics: willingness to be vaccinated, barriers and facilitators, and methods for providing vaccine information. Data were organized with NVivo software and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results

Fifteen clinic staff and 49 patients were interviewed. Barriers to vaccine uptake included a lack of knowledge and understanding of how the vaccine worked, distrust of the government, fear of side effects, and social pressure to stay unvaccinated. Vaccination facilitators included its widespread accessibility, a desire to protect themselves and vulnerable populations, and a previous unpleasant COVID-19 illness experience. Participants stated that vaccine information should be provided by health organizations and familiar, respected community members.

Conclusions

Results identified barriers to vaccination, such as mistrust of the government and healthcare system, and facilitators like vaccination advocacy originating from congregations and religious leaders. These findings can inform future COVID-19 vaccination efforts to increase overall immunization rates in MS. Future research in other locations could further assess commonalities and differences in the barriers and facilitators to vaccination.

Exploring the Big Data Paradox for various estimands using vaccination data from the global COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey (CTIS)

Selection bias poses a substantial challenge to valid statistical inference in nonprobability samples. This study compared estimates of the first-dose COVID-19 vaccination rates among Indian adults in 2021 from a large nonprobability sample, the COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey (CTIS), and a small probability survey, the Center for Voting Options and Trends in Election Research (CVoter), against national benchmark data from the COVID Vaccine Intelligence Network. Notably, CTIS exhibits a larger estimation error on average (0.37) compared to CVoter (0.14). Additionally, we explored the accuracy (regarding mean squared error) of CTIS in estimating successive differences (over time) and subgroup differences (for females versus males) in mean vaccine uptakes. Compared to the overall vaccination rates, targeting these alternative estimands comparing differences or relative differences in two means increased the effective sample size. These results suggest that the Big Data Paradox can manifest in countries beyond the United States and may not apply equally to every estimand of interest.

An effective COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy intervention focused on the relative risks of vaccination and infection

We designed the Relative Risk Tool (RRT) to help people assess the relative risks associated with COVID-19 vaccination and infection. In May 2022 (N = 400) and November 2022 (N = 615), U.S. residents participated in a survey that included questions about the risks of vaccination and infection. In both cohorts, we found an association between relative risk perception and vaccine hesitancy. Participants in the May cohort were randomly assigned an intervention: to see information from the RRT or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). After the intervention, participants answered the same questions about risk perception and vaccination intent again. The RRT was more effective than the CDC at changing risk perception and increasing vaccination intent. In November, the survey structure was the same, but the RRT was the only intervention included, and we confirmed that the RRT was effective at changing opinions in this new sample. Importantly, the RRT provided accurate information about the risks of serious adverse outcomes to vaccination and still increased vaccination intent. Our work suggests that the RRT helps people assess relative risk, which can in turn help empower them to make informed decisions and ultimately reduce vaccine hesitancy.

Association between vaccination beliefs and COVID-19 vaccine uptake in a longitudinal panel survey of adults in the United States, 2021-2022

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been a major limiting factor to the widespread uptake of COVID-19 vaccination in the United States. A range of interventions, including mass media campaigns, have been implemented to encourage COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake. Such interventions are often guided by theories of behavior change, which posit that behavioral factors, including beliefs, influence behaviors such as vaccination. Although previous studies have examined relationships between vaccination beliefs and COVID-19 vaccination behavior, they come with limitations, such as the use of cross-sectional study designs and, for longitudinal studies, few survey waves. To account for these limitations, we examined associations between vaccination beliefs and COVID-19 vaccine uptake using data from six waves of a nationally representative, longitudinal survey of U.S. adults (N = 3,524) administered over a nearly 2-year period (January 2021-November 2022). Survey-weighted lagged logistic regression models were used to examine the association between lagged reports of vaccination belief change and COVID-19 vaccine uptake, using five belief scales: (1) importance of COVID-19 vaccines, (2) perceived benefits of COVID-19 vaccination, (3) COVID-19 vaccine concerns and risks, (4) normative beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination, and (5) perceptions of general vaccine safety and effectiveness. Analyses controlled for confounding factors and accounted for within-respondent dependence due to repeated measures. In individual models, all vaccination belief scales were significantly associated with increased COVID-19 vaccine uptake. In a combined model, all belief scales except the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination were significant predictors of vaccine uptake. Overall, belief scales indicating the importance of COVID-19 vaccines and normative beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination were the strongest predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Findings demonstrate that changes in vaccination beliefs influence subsequent COVID-19 vaccine uptake, with implications for the development of future interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccination.

Income disparities in COVID-19 vaccine and booster uptake in the United States: An analysis of cross-sectional data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

COVID-19 vaccination has significantly decreased morbidity, hospitalizations, and death during the pandemic. However, disparities in vaccination uptake threatens to stymie the progress made in safeguarding the health of Americans. Using a nationally representative adult (≥18 years old) sample from the 2021 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), we aimed to explore disparities in COVID-19 vaccine and booster uptake by income levels. To reflect the nature of the survey, a weighted logistic regression analysis was used to explore factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine and booster uptake. A total of 241,645,704 (unweighted n = 21,554) adults were included in the analysis. Average (SD) age of the population was 49 (18) years old, and 51% were female. There were disparities in COVID-19 vaccine and booster uptake by income groups. All other income groups were less likely to receive COVID-19 vaccines and booster shot than those in the high-income group. Those in the poor income group had 55% lower odds of being vaccinated for COVID-19 (aOR = 0.45, p<0.01). Considering the female population only, women with lower incomes may have greater disparities in access to COVID-19 vaccines than do males with lower incomes. Disparities in COVID-19 vaccination by income may have even greater implications as the updated vaccines are rolled out in the US without the government covering the cost as before.

Heterogeneity in COVID-19 vaccine uptake within low-income minority communities: evidence from the watts neighborhood health study

BACKGROUND

The literature on disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake focuses primarily on the differences between White versus non-White individuals or differences by socioeconomic status. Much less is known about disparities in vaccine uptake within low-income, minority communities and its correlates.

METHODS

This study investigates disparities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake within racial and ethnic minoritized communities with similar socioeconomic backgrounds and built environments, specifically focusing on Black-Hispanic disparities and disparities within the Hispanic community by country of origin. Data are analyzed from the fourth wave (June 2021- May 2022) of the Watts Neighborhood Health Study, a cohort study of public housing residents in south Los Angeles, CA. Linear probability models estimated the association between vaccine uptake and participants' race/ethnicity, sequentially adding controls for sociodemographic characteristics, health care access and insurance, prior infection, and attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines. Differences in reasons for vaccination status by race/ethnicity were also tested.

RESULTS

Mexican Hispanic and non-Mexican Hispanic participants were 31% points (95% CI: 0.21, 0.41, p < 0.001) and 44% points (95% CI: 0.32, 0.56, p < 0.001) more likely to be vaccinated than non-Hispanic Black participants, respectively. The disparity between Black and Hispanic participants was reduced by about 40% after controlling for attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines. Among Hispanic participants, non-Mexican participants were 13% points (95% CI: 0.03, 0.24, p = 0.01) more likely to be vaccinated than Mexican participants, however, these differences were no longer significant after controlling for individual and household characteristics (β = 0.04, 95% CI: -0.07, 0.15, p = 0.44).

CONCLUSION

There are sizeable racial and ethnic COVID-19 vaccination disparities even within low-income and minoritized communities. Accounting for this heterogeneity and its correlates can be critically important for public health efforts to ensure vaccine equity.

Adjunctive interventions: change methods directed at recipients that support uptake and use of health innovations

BACKGROUND

Implementation science groups change methods into two categories: (1) clinical, behavioral, or biomedical intervention targeting recipient's health outcomes and (2) implementation strategies targeting the delivery system. Differentiating interventions from strategies based on their intended functions is critical to accurately attributing their effects to health or implementation outcomes. However, in coordinating 200+ HIV implementation research projects and conducting systematic reviews, we identified change methods that had characteristics of both interventions and strategies that were inconsistently categorized. To alleviate confusion and improve change method specification, we propose that implementation science should adopt an extant but rarely used term-adjunctive interventions-to classify change methods that are distinct from the common intervention/strategy taxonomy.

MAIN TEXT

Adjunctive interventions as change methods that target recipients (e.g., patients, participants) of a health intervention but are designed to increase recipients' motivation, self-efficacy, or capacity for initiating, adhering to, complying with, or engaging with the health intervention over time. In two of our published reviews on implementation of HIV interventions, 25 out of 45 coded change methods fell into this gray area between strategy and intervention. We also noted instances in which the same change method was labelled as the intervention ("the thing"), as an adjunctive intervention, or an implementation strategy in different studies-further muddying the waters. Adjunctive interventions are distinguished from other change methods by their intended targets, desired outcomes, and theory of action and causal processes. Whereas health interventions target recipients and have a direct, causal effect on the health outcome, adjunctive interventions enhance recipients' attitudes and behaviors to engage with the intervention and have an indirect causal link to the health outcome via increasing the probability of recipients' utilization and adherence to the intervention. Adjunctive interventions are incapable of directly producing the health outcome and will themselves require implementation strategies to effectively impact sustained uptake, utilization, and adherence. Case examples, logic modeling, and considerations (e.g., relationship to consumer engagement strategies) for adjunctive intervention research are provided.

CONCLUSION

Conceptualizing adjunctive interventions as a separate type of change method will advance implementation research by improving tests of effectiveness, and the specification of mechanisms and outcomes.

Understanding the role of risk preferences and perceptions in vaccination decisions and post-vaccination behaviors among U.S. households

COVID-19 vaccines play a critical role in protecting against infection and transmission of the virus. Therefore, understanding public perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines is essential for successful vaccine promotion. Previous literature reported strong associations between vaccination decisions and several sociodemographic variables. However, knowledge about how behavioral factors, including risk perceptions and preferences, impact individuals' attitudes towards receiving COVID-19 vaccination is currently lacking. Using data from a nationally representative survey of 1050 US adults, this study investigates the correlation between individuals' decisions to receive COVID-19 vaccination and both their risk perceptions and preferences. Additionally, we investigate post-vaccination behavior by measuring individuals' participation in three different groups of activities that vary by their degree of social exposure. We find strong correlations between vaccination decisions and four measures of risk preference and risk perception. We also find associations between the four risk measures and individuals' behaviors post-vaccination. We shed light on the main factors discouraging the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, as well as public opinions regarding the performance of different organizations in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, and grocery store policies to prevent COVID-19 infections. Our study provides critical information that can help policymakers communicate more effectively with the public and promote vaccine uptake among population groups and geographic areas with higher anti-vaccine sentiments.

Community Level Correlates of COVID-19 Booster Vaccine Hesitancy in the United States: A Cross-Sectional Analysis

Introduction: Evidence exists that individual-level sociodemographic factors contribute to vaccine hesitancy, but it is unknown how community-level factors affect COVID-19 booster dose hesitancy. The current study aims to fill this knowledge gap by comparing data from a nationwide survey on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy with a community-level indicator, i.e., the Distressed Communities Index (DCI). Methods: Attitudes toward vaccinations, vaccine literacy, COVID-19 vaccine confidence index, and trust were measured using a 48-item, psychometrically valid and reliable survey tool. In this study, 2138 survey participants residing in the United States were divided into quintiles of varying community distress levels based on their zip codes using the DCI. Data were analyzed through Chi-square, one-way ANOVA, and post hoc analysis with Tukey's test. Results: A significantly higher proportion of participants from the distressed communities had lower trust than their prosperous counterparts (26.6% vs. 37.6%, p < 0.001). On the contrary, participants from the prosperous communities had significantly higher vaccine confidence index scores than those in distressed communities (2.22 ± 1.13 vs. 1.70 ± 1.01, p < 0.001). Conclusions: These findings affirm the importance of developing community-level interventions to promote trust in COVID-19 vaccinations and increase booster dose uptake. From these results, future studies can examine the efficacy of various community-level interventions.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Excess All-Cause Mortality in the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Research on the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States has consistently found disproportionately high mortality among ethnoracial minorities, but reports differ with respect to the magnitude of mortality disparities and reach different conclusions regarding which groups were most impacted. We suggest that these variations stem from differences in the temporal scope of the mortality data used and difficulties inherent in measuring race and ethnicity. To circumvent these issues, we link Social Security Administration death records for 2010 through 2021 to decennial census and American Community Survey race and ethnicity responses. We use these linked data to estimate excess all-cause mortality for age-, sex-, race-, and ethnicity-specific subgroups and examine ethnoracial variation in excess mortality across states and over the course of the pandemic's first year. Results show that non-Hispanic American Indians and Alaska Natives experienced the highest excess mortality of any ethnoracial group in the first year of the pandemic, followed by Hispanics and non-Hispanic Blacks. Spatiotemporal and age-specific ethnoracial disparities suggest that the socioeconomic determinants driving health disparities prior to the pandemic were amplified and expressed in new ways in the pandemic's first year to disproportionately concentrate excess mortality among racial and ethnic minorities.

Co-designing a theory-informed, multicomponent intervention to increase vaccine uptake with Congolese migrants: A qualitative, community-based participatory research study (LISOLO MALAMU)

INTRODUCTION

Disparities in the uptake of routine and COVID-19 vaccinations have been observed in migrant populations, and attributed to issues of mistrust, access and low vaccine confidence. Participatory research approaches and behaviour change theory hold the potential for developing tailored vaccination interventions that address these complex barriers in partnership with communities and should be explored further.

METHODS

This study used a theory-informed, community-based participatory research approach to co-design a culturally tailored behaviour change intervention aimed at increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake among Congolese migrants in London, United Kingdom (2021-2022). It was designed and led by a community-academic partnership in response to unmet needs in the Congolese community as the COVID-19 pandemic started. Barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination, information and communication preferences, and intervention suggestions were explored through qualitative in-depth interviews with Congolese migrants, thematically analysed, and mapped to the theoretical domains framework (TDF) and the capability, opportunity, motivation, behaviour model to identify target behaviours and strategies to include in interventions. Interventions were co-designed and tailored in workshops involving Congolese migrants.

RESULTS

Thirty-two Congolese adult migrants (24 (75%) women, mean 14.3 (SD: 7.5) years in the United Kingdom, mean age 52.6 (SD: 11.0) years) took part in in-depth interviews and 16 (same sample) took part in co-design workshops. Fourteen barriers and 10 facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination were identified; most barrier data related to four TDF domains (beliefs about consequences; emotion; social influences and environmental context and resources), and the behavioural diagnosis concluded interventions should target improving psychological capability, reflective and automatic motivations and social opportunities. Strategies included culturally tailored behaviour change techniques based on education, persuasion, modelling, enablement and environmental restructuring, which resulted in a co-designed intervention comprising community-led workshops, plays and posters. Findings and interventions were disseminated through a community celebration event.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates how behavioural theory can be applied to co-designing tailored interventions with underserved migrant communities through a participatory research paradigm to address a range of health issues and inequalities. Future research should build on this empowering approach, with the goal of developing more sensitive vaccination services and interventions which respond to migrant communities' unique cultural needs and realities.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patient and public involvement (PPI) were embedded in the participatory study design and approach, with community members co-producing all stages of the study and co-authoring this paper. An independent PPI board (St George's Migrant Health Research Group Patient and Public Involvement Advisory Board) comprising five adult migrants with lived experience of accessing healthcare in the United Kingdom were also consulted at significant points over the course of the study.

Disproportionate infection, hospitalisation and death from COVID-19 in ethnic minority groups and Indigenous Peoples: an application of the Priority Public Health Conditions analytical framework

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in disproportionate consequences for ethnic minority groups and Indigenous Peoples. We present an application of the Priority Public Health Conditions (PPHC) framework from the World Health Organisation (WHO), to explicitly address COVID-19 and other respiratory viruses of pandemic potential. This application is supported by evidence that ethnic minority groups were more likely to be infected, implying differential exposure (PPHC level two), be more vulnerable to severe disease once infected (PPHC level three) and have poorer health outcomes following infection (PPHC level four). These inequities are driven by various interconnected dimensions of racism, that compounds with socioeconomic context and position (PPHC level one). We show that, for respiratory viruses, it is important to stratify levels of the PPHC framework by infection status and by societal, community, and individual factors to develop optimal interventions to reduce inequity from COVID-19 and future infectious diseases outbreaks.

Delivering COVID-19 Vaccine via Trusted Social Services: Program Evaluation Results from the Chicagoland CEAL Program

To describe the reach, implementation, and sustainability of COVID-19 vaccination programs delivered by social service community organizations. Five academic institutions in the Chicagoland CEAL (Community Engagement Alliance) program partnered with 17 community organizations from September 2021-April 2022. Interviews, community organizations program implementation tracking documents, and health department vaccination data were used to conduct the evaluation. A total of 269 events were held and 5,432 COVID-19 vaccines delivered from May 2021-April 2022. Strategies that worked best included offering vaccinations in community settings with flexible and reliable hours; pairing vaccinations with ongoing social services; giving community organizations flexibility to adjust programs; offering incentives; and vaccinating staff first. These strategies and partnership structures supported vaccine uptake, community organization alignment with their missions and communities' needs, and trust. Community organizations delivering social services are local community experts and trusted messengers. Pairing social service delivery with COVID-19 vaccination built individual and community agency. Giving COs creative control over program implementation enhanced trust and vaccine delivery. When given appropriate resources and control, community organizations can quickly deliver urgently needed health services in a public health crisis.

Association between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody status and reinfection: A case-control study nested in a Colorado-based prospective cohort study

The association between the presence of detectable antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and SARS-CoV-2 reinfection is not well established. The objective of this study was to determine the association between antibody seronegativity and reinfection.

METHODS

Participants in Colorado, USA, were recruited between June 15, 2020, and March 28, 2021, and encouraged to complete SARS-CoV-2 molecular ribonucleic acid (RNA) and serology testing for antibodies every 28 days for 10 months. Participants with reinfections (positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA test ≥ 90 days after the first positive RNA test) were matched to controls without reinfections by age, sex, date of the first positive RNA test, date of the last serology test, and serology test type. Using conditional logistic regression, case patients were compared to control patients on the last serologic test result, with adjustment for demographic and clinical confounders.

RESULTS

The cohort (n = 4,235) included 2,033 participants with ≥ 1 positive RNA test, of whom 120 had reinfection. Among the 80 case patients who could be matched, the last serologic test was negative in 12 of the cases (15.0 %) whereas the last serologic test was negative in 77 of 1,034 (7.5 %) controls. Seronegativity (adjusted OR [aOR] 2.24; 95 % CI 1.07, 4.68), Hispanic ethnicity (aOR 1.87; 95 % 1.10, 3.18), and larger household size (aOR 1.15; 95 % 1.01, 1.30 for each additional household member) were associated with reinfection.

CONCLUSIONS

Seronegative status, Hispanic ethnicity, and increasing household size were associated with reinfection. Serologic testing could be considered to reduce vaccine hesitancy in higher risk populations.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the global prevalence and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake in people living with HIV

People living with HIV (PLHIV) are at higher risk of poor outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here we report the pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance/uptake and determinants among this vulnerable population of PLHIV based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published by 25 August 2023. Among the 54 included studies (N = 167,485 participants), 53 (N = 166,455) provided data on vaccine acceptance rate, while 27 (N = 150,926) provided uptake data. The global prevalences of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake were 67.0% and 56.6%, respectively. Acceptance and uptake rates were 86.6% and 90.1% for the European Region, 74.9% and 71.6% for the Region of the Americas, 62.3% and 78.9% for the South-East Asian Region, 64.6% and 19.3% for the Eastern Mediterranean Region, 58.0% and 35.5% for the African Region, and 57.4% and 44.0% for the Western Pacific Region. The acceptance rate increased from 65.9% in 2020 to 71.0% in 2022, and the uptake rate increased from 55.9% in 2021 to 58.1% in 2022. Men, PLHIV aged ≥40 years and those who had recently received the influenza vaccine were more likely to accept and receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Factors associated with lower uptake included Black race, other races (Latinx/Hispanic/mixed race), low education level and being unemployed. Vaccine-related factors associated with higher acceptance included belief in vaccine effectiveness, vaccine trust, perceived high susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and fear of potential COVID-19 effect in PLHIV. Sustained efforts and targeted interventions are needed to reduce regional disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake among PLHIV.

Cross-sectional study of factors related to COVID-19 vaccination uptake among university healthcare students

Introduction

Healthcare students are more likely to become infected than other university students as they may encounter patients with COVID-19 during clinical training. Vaccination uptake is essential to prevent infection. This study explored factors related to COVID-19 vaccination uptake among healthcare students.

Methods

This cross-sectional study conducted online surveys of undergraduate and graduate nursing and healthcare graduate students from four medical universities in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area of Japan. Data were collected from June to August 2022, when the fourth vaccination program was initiated.

Results

Data from 1,169 students were analyzed (response rate = 37.3%). The mean age was 25.1 ± 7.6 years, and most were female (82.3%). Academic majors included nursing (68.0%), medicine (16.3%), dentistry (9.3%), and others (6.4%). Thirty students (2.6%) were not vaccinated, one student (0.1%) had received one vaccination, 997 (85.3%) had received three, and 27 (2.3%) had received four. The major reason for not being vaccinated was insufficient confirmation of its safety (n = 25). Students who had received at least one vaccination (n = 1,139), 965 (84.7%) reported experiencing adverse side effects, the most frequent being pain at the injection site (76.2%), followed by fever (68.3%). In the logistic regression, a greater number of vaccinations (3-4 times) was associated with older age (odds ratio, OR = 1.53), working (OR = 1.67), and more frequent infection-preventive behaviors (OR = 1.05). Significantly fewer students were vaccinated at University B than at University A (OR = 0.46). Additionally, those majoring in subjects other than nursing (OR = 0.28), and students from non-Asian countries (OR = 0.30) were less likely to be vaccinated.

Discussion

It is necessary to pay attention to and encourage the vaccination of students who engage in low levels of preventive behavior, students who are young, international, or unemployed, and those in non-healthcare professional majors.

Characterization of COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial discussions on the social question-and-answer site Quora

INTRODUCTION

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, underserved populations, such as racial and ethnic minorities, were disproportionately impacted by illness, hospitalization, and death. Equity in clinical trials means that the participants in clinical trials represent the people who are most likely to have the health condition and need the treatment that the trial is testing. Infodemiology approaches examining user conversations on social media platforms have the potential to elucidate specific barriers and challenges related to clinical trial participation, including among racial and ethnic minority populations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study retrospectively collected and analyzed user question and answer posts from Quora in October 2021 using an inductive content coding approach. We also examined user's publicly available profile metadata to identify racial and ethnic minority users to capture their experiences, attitudes, topics, and discussions of barriers to COVID-19 vaccine trials.

RESULTS

A total of 1073 questions and 7479 answers were collected. A total of 763 questions and 2548 answers were identified as related to COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials. The majority of these online interactions focused on asking questions and sharing knowledge and opinions about COVID-19 vaccine trials, including major topics related to: (a) interpreting whether clinical trial results could be trusted; (b) questions about vaccine efficacy and safety; (c) understanding trial design, regulatory considerations, and vaccine platforms; and (d) questions about trial enrollment, length, and adequate representation. Additionally, four major barriers discussed included: (i) disagreement from users regarding whether clinical trials require representation from different racial and ethnic minorities; (ii) concerns regarding the safety of trials when participating; (iii) lack of knowledge on how to participate in a trial; and (iv) questions of whether participants could withdraw from a trial to access an approved COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found active user discussions related to COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials on Quora, including those specific to minority health topics and those posted by a smaller group of self-identified racial and ethnic minority online users. Results from this study can help identify barriers to participation among the general public and underrepresented groups while also supporting the design of future outreach strategies to help with recruitment and inclusive trial participation.