Estimating the size of "anti-vax" and vaccine hesitant populations in the US, UK, and Canada: comparative latent class modeling of vaccine attitudes

Building confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine in a polio-endemic country: strategic communication lessons from Pakistan

In a health emergency, governments rely on public trust in their policy, and anticipate its compliance to protect health and save lives. Vaccine hesitancy compromises this process when an emergency involves infections. The prevailing discourse on vaccine hesitancy often describes it as a static phenomenon, ignoring its expanse and complexity, and neglecting the exploration of tools to address it. This article diverges from the conventional perspective by explaining the case of Pakistan and its communication strategy for the COVID-19 vaccine. Decades of polio vaccine hesitancy, rooted in the country's fight against terrorism, constitute its history. On the other hand, the first-ever launch of typhoid conjugate vaccine involving 35 million kids during 2019-2021 was a success. Against this backdrop, the country considered vaccine hesitancy as a dynamic phenomenon, interwoven with the social ecology and the responsiveness of the healthcare system. Its communication strategy facilitated those willing to receive the vaccine, while being responsive to the information needs of those still in the decision-making process. In the face of both hesitancy and a scarcity of vaccine doses, the country successfully inoculated nearly 70% (160 million) of its population in just over 1 year. People's perceptions about the COVID-19 vaccine also improved over time. This achievement offers valuable insights and tools for policymakers and strategists focused on the demand side of vaccine programmes. The lessons can significantly contribute to the global discourse on improving vaccine confidence and bolstering global health security.

Hepatitis A hospitalisations in the United States and risk factors for inpatient mortality: A nationwide population study, 1998-2020

Hepatitis A virus infections in the United States have been declining; however, recent widespread outbreaks have brought the disease back into the spotlight. We aim to describe the epidemiology of hepatitis A hospitalisations from 1998 to 2020 in the United States and investigate risk factors for inpatient mortality. We utilised the National Inpatient Sample database and identified hepatitis A-related hospitalisations using ICD-9 and ICD-10 diagnosis codes. Demographic and clinical data including death, coinfections, comorbidities and pregnancy status were extracted. Data were analysed by logistic and Poisson regression. We identified a total of 213,681 hepatitis A-related hospitalisations between 1998 and 2020, with hospitalisation rates ranging between 22.4 per 1,000,000 and 62.9 per 1,000,000. Between 1998 and 2015, the hospitalisation rate for hepatitis A was decreasing (IRR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-0.98; p < .001); however, between 2015 and 2020, it increased overall (IRR = 1.22; 95% CI: 1.21-1.23; p < .001). The overall inpatient mortality rate was 2.7%. Age ≥55 years (OR = 1.84; 95% CI: 1.41-2.40; p < .001), alcoholic cirrhosis (OR = 2.53; 95% CI: 1.64-3.90; p < .001), ascites (OR = 2.65; 95% CI: 1.86-3.78; p < .001), hepatorenal syndrome (OR = 9.04; 95% CI: 5.93-13.80; p < .001), heart failure (OR = 1.76; 95% CI: 1.29-2.39; p < .001), pulmonary hypertension (OR = 2.02; 95% CI: 1.28-3.19; p = .003) and malignant neoplasm (OR = 1.75; 95% CI: 1.25-2.45; p = .001) were associated with increased odds of mortality. Tobacco use disorder (OR = 0.52; 95% CI: 0.38-0.70; p < .001) was associated with decreased odds of mortality. None of the hepatitis A-associated hospitalisations involving pregnant women resulted in death. Hepatitis A hospitalisations initially declined but increased rapidly after 2015. Certain risk factors can be used to predict prognosis of hospitalised patients.

Should vaccination status be a consideration during secondary triage?

The rapid development of widely available and effective vaccines has been integral to the international response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, a significant minority of those offered vaccination have refused, often due to their adherence to 'anti-vax' beliefs. These beliefs include that vaccines are dangerous, render the recipient magnetic or contain government microchips.During the pandemic, numerous calls were made for those voluntarily refusing vaccination to be deprioritised when allocating scarce healthcare resources. While these calls were rejected, the likelihood of the same calls being made during future pandemics necessitates a thorough examination of the ethical implications entailed by such a policy.Here, I consider an intuitive argument for the use of vaccination status when allocating healthcare resources. This argument claims that, by avoiding vaccination, vaccine refusers are failing to fulfil a social obligation to protect those around them from harm by facilitating herd immunity. They are, therefore, less deserving of healthcare than their vaccinated peers.I explore three objections to this argument. While a first objection, asserting that no individual can be held responsible for a failure to develop herd immunity, fails, I find two further responses, respectively asserting the primacy of patient autonomy and highlighting the harms deprioritising vaccine refusers would cause to disadvantaged minorities, compelling. I, therefore, conclude that vaccination status should not be considered during healthcare resource allocation, as such discrimination would disproportionately harm marginalised communities.

Predictors of Intention to Vaccinate or Continue to Vaccinate Children Against SARS-CoV-2 During the Fifth Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the USA

The Centre for Disease Control recommends vaccination of children against SARS-CoV-2 to reduce the severity of COVID-19 disease and reduce the likelihood of associated complications. Vaccination of children requires the consent of parents or guardians, and levels of consent may ebb and flow over the course of the pandemic. This exploratory study examines predictors of parental intentions to vaccinate their children and the speed with which they would have them vaccinated during the fifth wave of the pandemic when vaccines were just being approved for use in children using a convenience sample of 641 parents reporting on 962 children. Multi-level regression analyses demonstrated regional differences in likelihood, with those in the Northeast reporting higher likelihood than those in the West. Parents with a conservative belief system were less likely to want to have their children vaccinated. Parents were more likely to have their child vaccinated if the child had COVID-19-related health risks, their child had a more complete vaccination history, and COVID-19 was perceived to be a greater threat to oneself and one's family. Faster intended vaccination speed was associated with regional urbanicity, liberal belief systems, more complete vaccination histories, and parental COVID-19 vaccination history. Higher levels of parental anxiety and lower levels of perceived vaccine danger were associated with increased speed. The severity of the COVID-19 pandemic within one's county was marginally related to speed, but not likelihood. These results underscore the importance of regular assessment of parental intentions across the pandemic, for practitioners to probe parental anxiety levels when discussing vaccination, to explicitly address risk/benefit analyses when communicating with parents, and to target previously routine unvaccinated parents and those in more rural areas to increase vaccine uptake. Comparisons are made with Galanis et al.'s (2022) recent meta-analysis on the topic.

The impact of geo-political socio-economic factors on vaccine dissemination trends: a case-study on COVID-19 vaccination strategies

BACKGROUND

The world in recent years has seen a pandemic of global scale. To counter the widespread loss of life and severe repercussions, researchers developed vaccinations at a fast pace to immunize the population. While the vaccines were developed and tested through extensive human trials, historically vaccines have been known to evoke mixed sentiments among the generic demographics. In the proposed study, we aim to reveal the impact of political and socio-economic factors on SARS-Cov-2 vaccination trends observed in two hundred and seventeen countries spread across the six continents.

METHODS

The study had hypothesized that the citizens who have lower trust in their government would be less inclined towards vaccination programs. To test this hypothesis, vaccination trends of nations under authoritarian rule were compared against democratic nations. Further, the study was synthesized with Cov-2 vaccination data which was sourced from Our World Data repository, which was sampled among 217 countries spread across the 6 continents. The study was analyzed with exploratory data analysis and proposed with relevance and impacting factor that was considered for vaccine dissemination in comparison with the literacy rate of the nations. Another impacting factor the study focused on for the vaccination dissemination trends was the health expenses of different nations. The study has been synthesized on political and socio-economic factors where the features were ardently study in retrospect of varied socio- economic features which may include country wise literacy rate, overall GDP rate, further we substantiated the work to address the political factors which are discussed as the country status of democratic or having other status.

RESULTS

The comparison of trends showed that dissemination of SARS-Cov-2 vaccines had been comparable between the two-opposing types of governance. The major impact factor behind the wide acceptance of the SARS-Cov-2 vaccine was the expenditure done by a country on healthcare. These nations used a large number of vaccines to administer to their population and the trends showed positive growth. The overall percentage of vaccine utilized by countries in quantitative terms are Pfizer/BioNTech (17.55%), Sputnik V (7.08%), Sinovac (6.98%), Sinopharm/Beijing (10.04%), Oxford/AstraZeneca (19.56%), CanSino (2.85%), Moderna (12.05%), Covaxin (3.28%), JohnsonandJohnson (10.89%), Sputnik Light (3.07%), Novavax (3.49%). While the nations with the lowest healthcare expenses failed to keep up with the demand and depended on vaccines donated by other countries to protect their population.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis revealed strong indicators that the nations which spend more on healthcare were the ones that had the best SARS-Cov-2 vaccination rollout. To further support decision-making in the future, countries should address the trust and sentiment of their citizens towards vaccination. For this, expenses need to be made to develop and promote vaccines and project them as positive health tools.

The impact of educational interventions on COVID-19 and vaccination attitudes among patients in Michigan: A prospective study

Background

Mass vaccination serves as an effective strategy to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccine hesitancy is a recognized impediment to achieving a vaccination rate necessary to protect communities. However, solutions and interventions to address this issue are limited by a lack of prior research.

Methods

Over 200 patients from 18 Michigan counties participated in this study. Each participant received an initial survey, including demographical questions and knowledge and opinion questions regarding COVID-19 and vaccines. Participants were randomly assigned an educational intervention in either video or infographic format. Patients received a post-survey to assess changes in knowledge and attitudes. Paired sample t-tests and ANOVA were used to measure the effectiveness of the educational interventions. Participants also elected to complete a 3-month follow-up survey.

Results

Patients showed increased knowledge after the educational intervention in six out of seven COVID-19 topics (p &lt; 0.005). There was increased vaccine acceptance after the intervention but no difference in the effectiveness between the two intervention modalities. Post-intervention, more patients believed in CDC recommendations (p = 0.005), trusted the vaccine (p = 0.001), believed the vaccines had adequate testing (p = 0.019), recognized prior mistreatment in the medical care system (p = 0.005), agreed that a source they trust told them to receive a vaccine (p = 0.015), and were worried about taking time off of work to get a vaccine (p = 0.023). Additionally, post-intervention, patients were less concerned about mild reactions of the virus (p = 0.005), the rapid development of the vaccines (p &lt; 0.001), and vaccine side effects (p = 0.031). Data demonstrated that attitude and knowledge improved when comparing pre-educational intervention to follow-up but decreased from post-intervention to follow-up.

Conclusion

The findings illustrate that educational interventions improved COVID-19 and vaccine knowledge among patients and that the knowledge was retained. Educational interventions serve as powerful tools to increase knowledge within communities and address negative views on vaccination. Interventions should be continually utilized to reinforce information within communities to improve vaccination rates.

COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and facilitators among people in Australia who inject drugs

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to describe COVID-19 vaccination attitudes and identify potential facilitators for vaccine uptake among people who inject drugs.

METHODS

People who inject drugs were recruited from all eight Australian capital cities (N = 884; 65% male, mean age 44 years) and interviewed face-to-face or via telephone in June-July 2021. COVID-19 and broader vaccination attitudes were used to model latent classes. Correlates of class membership were assessed through multinomial logistic regression. Probability of endorsing potential vaccination facilitators were reported by class.

RESULTS

Three classes of participants were identified: 'vaccine acceptant' (39%), 'vaccine hesitant' (34%) and 'vaccine resistant' (27%). Those in the hesitant and resistant groups were younger, more likely to be unstably housed and less likely to have received the current season influenza vaccine than the acceptant group. In addition, hesitant participants were less likely to report a chronic medical condition than acceptant participants. Compared to vaccine acceptant and hesitant participants, vaccine-resistant participants were more likely to predominantly inject methamphetamine and to inject drugs more frequently in the past month. Both vaccine-hesitant and resistant participants endorsed financial incentives for vaccination and hesitant participants also endorsed facilitators related to vaccine trust.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

People who inject drugs who are unstably housed or predominantly inject methamphetamine are subgroups that require targeted interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Vaccine-hesitant people may benefit from interventions that build trust in vaccine safety and utility. Financial incentives may improve vaccine uptake among both hesitant and resistant people.

Exploring Canadian perceptions and experiences of stigma during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to stigmatization of individuals based on race/ethnicity, age, gender, and occupation, among other factors. We canvassed Canadian residents to explore perceptions of and experiences with stigma during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We conducted an online survey between June 10 and December 31 2020. The survey was rooted in the Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework and included multiple choice, Likert and open-ended questions related to perceived and experienced stigma. Residents of Ontario, Canada were eligible to participate and we aimed to recruit a sample that was diverse by race/ethnicity and age.

Results

A total of 1,823 individuals participated in the survey (54% women, 39% men; 54% 18-40 years old, 28% 41-60 years old, 12% 61+ years old; 33% White, 26% East/SouthEast Asian, 14% Black, 12% South Asian). Fifty-one percent of participants agreed/strongly agreed that racist views had increased toward certain racial/ethnic groups in Canada during the pandemic. Participants perceived that people in Canada were stigmatized during the pandemic because of race/ethnicity (37%), political beliefs (26%), older age (24%), being a healthcare worker (23%), younger age (22%), being an essential worker (21%), and gender (11%). Thirty-nine percent of respondents feared experiencing and 37% experienced stigmatization during the pandemic. Men, individuals aged 18-40, and racialized participants were more likely to fear or experience stigma. With respect to health behaviors, 74, 68, and 59% of respondents were comfortable masking in public, seeking medical care if they became ill, and getting tested for COVID-19, respectively. Men were less likely to indicate comfort with mask wearing or seeking medical care. Participants aged 18-40 and Black participants were less likely to indicate comfort with all three behaviors compared to those over age 41 and White participants, respectively. South Asian participants were less likely to be comfortable seeking medical care compared to White Participants.

Discussion

Participants feared or experienced stigmatization towards various demographic characteristics during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is critical that the factors driving stigma during health emergencies in Canada be better understood in order to develop effective public health messaging and interventions.

COVID-19 Severity and Mortality after Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in Central Greece

Background: Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) has become crucial for limiting disease transmission and reducing its severity, hospitalizations and mortality; however, despite universal acceptance, vaccine hesitancy is still significant. In the present manuscript, we aim to assess COVID-19-attributed mortality after the prevalence of new variants of the virus (Delta and Omicron viral strains) and to evaluate the vaccination effect. Methods: All patients that were hospitalized due to COVID-19 infection in the Respiratory Department of a tertiary referral center in central Greece between 1st of June 2021 and 1st of February 2022 were included in the present study. Results: 760 consecutive patients were included in the study; 89 (11.7%) were diagnosed with severe COVID-19 and 220 (38.7%) patients were fully vaccinated. In logistic regression, increased age (aOR = 1.12, p < 0.001), male gender (aOR = 2.29, p = 0.013) and vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 virus (aOR = 0.2, p < 0.001) were associated with mortality attributed to COVID-19 with a statistically significant association. Moreover, increased age (aOR = 1.09, p < 0.001), male gender (aOR = 1.92, p = 0.025) and vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 virus (aOR = 0.25, p < 0.001) were statistically significantly associated with clinical severity of COVID-19 infection. However, when comparing the length of hospitalization between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients, the difference was not statistically significant between the two groups (p = 0.138). Conclusions: Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 virus had a protective effect in terms of mortality and clinical severity of COVID-19 during the fourth wave of the pandemic in Central Greece. The national vaccination policy has to focus on vulnerable populations that are expected to benefit the most from the vaccine’s protection.

Stamping the vaccine passport? Public support for lifting COVID-19 related restrictions for vaccinated citizens in France, Germany, and Sweden

During theCOVID-19pandemic,manycountries implementedrestrictionsto limit the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (e.g. travel restrictions and lockdowns).One path to loosening restrictions is to do so selectively only for vaccinated individuals (e.g. by implementing vaccine passports domestically or as a prerequisite for international travel).Setting different rules based on people's vaccination statusis howevera contentious issue among health policy experts, government officials, and the public. Our analysis focuses on the levels and correlates of public support for the lifting of restrictions for the vaccinatedin April 2021, i.e. at a time when restrictions were in place and aselective lifting of these restrictions just for the vaccinatedwas debated in Europe.We use representative quota samples of the populations of France (N = 1,752), Germany (N = 1,759), and Sweden (N = 1,754). We find that a slight plurality support lifting restrictions for the vaccinated in France and Germany but not in Sweden. Vaccine hesitancy emerges as strong predictor of opposition to such a policy. Additionally, individuals who are already vaccinated (in France and Germany) and who are higher in risk-seeking express more support for the lifting of restrictions for the vaccinated. We discuss implications for the debate on vaccine passports.

How Vaccinations Changed the Outcome of COVID-19 Infections in Kidney Transplant Patients: Single-Center Experience

Kidney transplant recipients are a vulnerable population at risk of a life-threatening COVID-19 infection with an incidence of death four-times higher than in the general population. The availability of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines has dramatically changed the fate of this infection also within this fragile population. Transplanted patients have an impaired immunological response also to mRNA vaccines. In March 2021, however, we started a vaccination campaign. These preliminary results show that both the incidence of death and of hospitalization dropped from 13% to 2.4% and from 45% to 12.5% compared to the previous outbreaks reported by our group. In univariate analysis, two variables were associated with an increased risk of hospitalization: older age and dyspnea (p = 0.023, p < 0.0001, respectively). In multivariate analysis, dyspnea (p < 0.0001) and mycophenolate therapy (p = 0.003) were independently associated with the risk of hospitalization. The association was even stronger when the two variables were combined (p < 0.0001). Vaccinations did not reduce the incidence of COVID-19 infections among our transplanted patients, but provided certain protection that was associated with a significantly better outcome for this infection.

Minimal effects from injunctive norm and contentiousness treatments on COVID-19 vaccine intentions: evidence from 3 countries

Does information about how other people feel about COVID-19 vaccination affect immunization intentions? We conducted preregistered survey experiments in Great Britain (5,456 respondents across 3 survey waves from September 2020 to February 2021), Canada (1,315 respondents in February 2021), and the state of New Hampshire in the United States (1,315 respondents in January 2021). The experiments examine the effects of providing accurate public opinion information to people about either public support for COVID-19 vaccination (an injunctive norm) or public beliefs that the issue is contentious. Across all 3 countries, exposure to this information had minimal effects on vaccination intentions even among people who previously held inaccurate beliefs about support for COVID-19 vaccination or its perceived contentiousness. These results suggest that providing information on public opinion about COVID vaccination has limited additional effect on people's behavioral intentions when public discussion of vaccine uptake and intentions is highly salient.

Parental childhood vaccine hesitancy and predicting uptake of vaccinations: a systematic review

Aim:

This review aims are to (1) identify relevant quantitative research on parental childhood vaccine hesitancy with vaccine uptake and vaccination intention being relevant outcomes and (2) map the gaps in knowledge on vaccine hesitancy to develop suggestions for further research and to guide interventions in this field.

Background:

Vaccine hesitancy recognises a continuum between vaccine acceptance and vaccine refusal, de-polarising past anti-vaccine, and pro-vaccine categorisations of individuals and groups. Vaccine hesitancy poses a serious challenge to international efforts to lessen the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases. Potential vaccination barriers must be identified to inform initiatives aimed at increasing vaccine awareness, acceptance, and uptake.

Methods:

Five databases were searched for peer-reviewed articles published between 1998 and 2020 in the fields of medicine, nursing, public health, biological sciences, and social sciences. Across these datasets, a comprehensive search technique was used to identify multiple variables of public trust, confidence, and hesitancy about vaccines. Using PRISMA guidelines, 34 papers were included so long as they focused on childhood immunisations, employed multivariate analysis, and were published during the time frame. Significant challenges to vaccine uptake or intention were identified in these studies. Barriers to vaccination for the target populations were grouped using conceptual frameworks based on the Protection Motivation Theory and the World Health Organization’s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization Working Group model and explored using the 5C psychological antecedents of vaccination.

Findings:

Although several characteristics were shown to relate to vaccine hesitancy, they do not allow for a thorough classification or proof of their individual and comparative level of influence. Understudied themes were also discovered during the review. Lack of confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility have all been highlighted as barriers to vaccination uptake among parents to different degrees.