Exploring Motivations for COVID-19 Vaccination Among Black Young Adults in 3 Southern US States: Cross-sectional Study

Leveraging the Arts to Address and Elevate Vaccine Confidence: A Culturally Responsive and Equitable Evaluation of an Arts Intervention for Black Residents in Rural Georgia

Despite pronounced disparities in COVID-19 cases and mortality among communities of color in the United States, and vaccines being a potentially lifesaving prevention measure, vaccination rates are still lower among racial minorities, especially Black people, compared to White people. Reasons such as distrust in the U.S. government and healthcare system underlie vaccine deliberation, which contributes to low vaccine uptake among Black people. The creative and community-based program, "Equitable Vaccines," uses the arts to address vaccine deliberation and boost vaccine confidence among Black people in rural Georgia. Program facilitators implemented vaccine events, bringing together community members to view an artistic asset (e.g., creative short film) and engage participants in candid conversations surrounding COVID-19 and vaccine deliberation. Subsequently, participants were invited to receive a COVID vaccine and complete a brief online post-event survey. Program facilitators also reported their observations and interactions with participants via an Asana post-event report. An analysis of these fieldnotes highlights the community's evolving experiences with COVID-19, the vaccine, and reasons for vaccine deliberation between late 2021 and 2024. Findings revealed that mistrust in U.S. institutions and systems and misinformation was a prominent theme across the entire program duration, but there was also a shift toward motivation for getting vaccinated toward the latter part of the program. We recommend using creative and culturally responsive techniques in designing, implementing, and evaluating public health interventions to address vaccine deliberation and other public health concerns in Black communities across the United States.

Development and validation of the mpox stigma scale (MSS) and mpox knowledge scale (MKS)

BACKGROUND

Few validated brief scales are available to measure constructs that may hinder mpox-related prevention and care engagement, such as knowledge and stigma. Both are highly salient barriers to infectious disease care and disease understanding, precursors to evaluating one's risk and need to, for example, accept vaccination. To address this gap, we developed and validated the Mpox Stigma Scale (MSS) and Mpox Knowledge Scale (MKS).

METHODS

As part of a full-scale clinical trial, we offered an optional mpox survey to participants who self-identified as African American or Black, were 18-29 years old, and lived in Alabama, Georgia, or North Carolina (2023, N = 330). We calculated psychometric properties through confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) and applied Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), and Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) values equal to or exceeding 0.90 and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) values less than 0.08 to determine adequate model fit. We computed internal reliability using Cronbach's alpha and calculated Pearson or Spearman correlation coefficients between the MSS and MKS and related variables.

RESULTS

For the MSS, CFA results showed that the one-factor model fit the data well (χ2(df = 5, N = 330) = 34.962, CFI = 0.97, GFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.13, SRMR = 0.03). For the MKS, the one-factor model provided a good fit to the data (χ2(df = 6, N = 330) = 8.44, CFI = 0.99, GFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.15, SRMR = 0.02). Cronbach's alphas were MSS = 0.91 and MKS = 0.83, suggesting good to excellent reliability. The MSS was correlated with the MKS (r = .55, p < .001), stigmatizing attitudes (r = .24, p < .001), attitudes towards mpox vaccination (r=-.12, p = .030), and worry about contracting mpox (r = .44, p < .001). The MKS was correlated with worry about contracting mpox (r = .30, p < .001) and mpox disclosure (r=-.16, p = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

The MSS and MKS are reliable and valid tools for public health practice, treatment and prevention research, and behavioral science. Further validation is warranted across populations and geographic locations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05490329.

COVID-19 vaccine intentions and attitudes in Black American emerging adults with asthma

BACKGROUND

Emerging adults (aged 18-29) are less likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine than any other adult age group. Black Americans are less likely than non-Hispanic white Americans to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19. This study explored factors which affect vaccine intention and attitudes in Black American emerging adults with asthma.

METHODS

Participants were recruited from an NHLBI-funded clinical trial to improve asthma control. Fifty-nine Black American emerging adults completed a Qualtrics survey that assessed asthma control, intention to vaccinate, and factors which may affect the decision to vaccinate. Twenty-five participants also completed a semi-structured interview via Zoom. Bivariate correlations and descriptive statistics, including Chi Square analyses, were run using SPSS. Interview thematic analyses were conducted via QDA Miner.

RESULTS

Of the 59 Black American emerging adults with asthma who completed surveys, 32.2% responded that they were highly unlikely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, while 50.8% responded that they were highly likely to receive it. Increased asthma control was significantly correlated with a higher likelihood to discuss the COVID-19 vaccine with their healthcare provider (ρ = 0.339, α = 0.011). Concerns about immediate (ρ= -0.261, α = 0.050) and long-term (ρ= -0.280, α = 0.035) side effects were inversely correlated with intention to vaccinate. Only 17% of the participants who were unemployed stated that they were highly likely to receive the vaccines compared to 65% of the participants who were employed; however, interview participants who were unemployed stated not needing the vaccine because they were protecting themselves by social distancing. When deciding whether to receive the vaccine, safety, efficacy, and immediate side effects were the top three factors for 91%, 54%, and 49% of the participants, respectively. Beliefs about the vaccines' safety and efficacy, information gathering, personal factors, and societal factors emerged as important themes from the interviews.

CONCLUSION

Only half of the surveyed Black American emerging adults with asthma were highly likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Safety and efficacy were important for the majority of the participants, regardless of vaccine intention. Greater asthma control, but not access to asthma-related healthcare, was correlated with intention to discuss the vaccine with their healthcare provider.

"If it wasn't forced upon me, I would have given it a second thought": Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in an outlier county in the Bay Area, California

While the San Francisco Bay Area counties rank very low in vaccine hesitancy and high in vaccination rates when compared to national numbers, Solano County has the most residents who are hesitant (6.3%) and the least who are fully vaccinated (51.6%) among Bay Area counties, according to the CDC. No studies to date have been able to provide the in-depth, localized information that would inform county-level public health interventions. This study aims to explore reasons and consequences for remaining unvaccinated in Solano County. Using a qualitative in-depth interview approach, we conducted 32 interviews with unvaccinated adults from Solano County. We used a grounded theory approach to our analysis. Using the socio-ecological model as a framework, we found that reasons for not getting vaccinated were primarily structural (mistrust of public information) and individual (bodily autonomy, personal choice) while consequences were primarily interpersonal (discrimination and stigma from friends, family, and employers). An overarching theme was that the vaccine rollout and messaging felt like an encroachment on personal choice and the feeling of being forced created more mistrust. Participants reported feeling like their decisions made them minorities among their colleagues, friends and family and that they were not persuaded by groupthink or by their relationships. Future public health responses to epidemics and pandemics might consider if a vaccine mandate is the best approach for reaching all county residents.

Knowledge, acceptance, motivators and barriers of booster dose of COVID-19 vaccination among dental patients: A cross-sectional study

Given the lingering threat of COVID infection, questions are being raised if coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine needs annual or regular boosters to maintain high levels of immunity against both the original virus and variants. This study was designed to evaluate the knowledge, acceptance, motivators and barriers of the booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine among the dental patients of District Lucknow, India. A total of 297 respondents were selected by a convenience sampling method in this cross-sectional study from various dental clinics. An anonymous, self-administered, closed-ended questionnaire was used. Overall 37.7% respondents reported to have taken all 3 doses and 57.9% had taken single/double doses. Correct information about booster doses shows a significant association with the number of doses taken. The majority had information about the availability of the Pfizer booster vaccine (69.0%). About 58% of participants had information about the technology used in booster doses. The hesitancy for booster doses and the development of natural immunity by infection show significant associations with the number of doses taken. Only 18.2% patients had hesitation about the booster dose and most of them 78.8% recommended others to take the booster vaccine as soon as possible. The majority assumed that previous COVID-19 vaccines can help them get immune (21.5%) followed by not much research has been done on the booster vaccines (15.5%) and their chronic diseases warn them against the booster dose administration (12.5%). Nearly 18.2% of respondents had hesitation about booster dose and less than one third of the respondents trusted a government source for information about booster dose of COVID vaccine. Nearly 36 % did not know that the booster dose of COVID vaccine is available at health centers. Dental health professionals and policymakers should implement and support strategies to ensure people are vaccinated for COVID-19 booster doses.

In the Face of a Pandemic: "I Felt the Same as When the War Started"-A Qualitative Study on COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Objectives: To conduct qualitative study with different target groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to explore their views on barriers and drivers for COVID-19 vaccination, and to see if and how barriers and drivers vary between urban and rural locations, and different professional roles. Methods: The theoretical framework underpinning the study is the capability-opportunity-motivation (COM-B) behavior change framework, which has been adapted to monitor vaccine related behavior and attitudes. Data was collected from June to September 2022 through moderated discussions in focus groups. The total of 162 participants participated in 16 focus groups. Results: Among the key barriers to successful immunization identified across target groups were insufficient knowledge about vaccines, pandemic fatigue, concerns about the rapid development of the vaccine and its effectiveness, lack of confidence in the healthcare system. Some of the main drivers of vaccination against COVID-19 were confidence in science and expert recommendations. Conclusion: The COVID-19 immunization policy undergoes continuous changes, as do the pandemic prospects; we encourage further research to track the evolution of vaccine related attitudes, inform immunization policy, and create evidence-based interventions.

A multivariable model of barriers to COVID-19 vaccination: Using cross sectional data from a nationally distributed survey in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Discrimination has had longstanding effects on mental and physiological health, which became more evident and synergized during the COVID-19 pandemic. The role of discrimination on vaccination for COVID-19 during the pandemic, however, is not well understood. As such, we examined the relationship of everyday discrimination on COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

Using a multivariate logistic regression on data collected from a nationally distributed survey in the United States (US), we examined the relationship of discrimination measured by the Everyday Discrimination Scale on self-reported COVID-19 vaccination while adjusting for US nativity, as well as sociodemographic (i.e., age; gender; sexual orientation; race, and ethnicity) and socioeconomic (i.e., educational attainment; employment status; household income) factors.

RESULTS

We found that participants reporting monthly to weekly discrimination and multiple times a week to daily discrimination had decreased odds of reporting COVID-19 vaccination (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.68-0.90; and AOR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.62-0.91, respectively) compared to those that reported no discrimination experienced. Educational attainment of high school equivalent or above, employment as an essential worker, and household-annual income of $50,000 or greater were significant socioeconomic factors. Age, sexual orientation, and race/ethnicity had mixed associations with COVID-19 vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Discrimination overall remained a significant barrier to vaccination, while nativity was not significant when accounting for socioeconomic and sociodemographic factors. Discrimination must become a public health priority in addressing disparities in health and access and barriers that may affect preventive behaviors.

Exploring the Influencing Factors of COVID-19 Vaccination Willingness among Young Adults in China

Vaccine uptake is considered as one of the most effective methods of defending against COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). However, many young adults are hesitant regarding COVID-19 vaccines, and they actually play an important role in virus transmission. Based on a multi-theory model, this study aims to explore the influencing factors related to COVID-19 vaccine willingness among young adults in China. Using semi-structured interviews, this study explored the factors that would motivate young adults with vaccine hesitancy to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the interview data with topic modeling as a complementarity method. After comparing the differences and similarities of results generated by thematic analysis and topic modeling, this study ultimately identified ten key factors related to COVID-19 vaccination intention, including the effectiveness and safety of vaccines, application range of vaccine, etc. This study combined thematic analysis with machine learning and provided a comprehensive and nuanced picture of facilitating factors for COVID-19 vaccine uptake among Chinese young adults. Results may be taken as potential themes for authorities and public health workers in vaccination campaigns.

COVID-19 Vaccination: Comparison of Attitudes, Decision-Making Processes, and Communication among Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Black Americans

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccination rates remain suboptimal among Black Americans who disproportionately experience higher hospitalization and death rates than White Americans.

METHODS

We conducted a multi-method (interviews and surveys) study among 30 Black Americans (n = 16 vaccinated, n = 14 unvaccinated) to explore factors related to vaccination hesitancy, decision-making processes, and communication related to uptake. Participants were recruited by using community-driven approaches, including partner collaborations. Thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative data, and descriptive and bivariate analysis was used for quantitative data.

RESULTS

Of those unvaccinated, 79% (n = 11) stated they were delaying and 21% (n = 3) were declining vaccination indefinitely. When asked about the likelihood of vaccine initiation in 6 months and 12 months, 29% (n = 4) and 36% (n = 5), respectively, stated that they would receive the vaccine. The following themes emerged: (1) COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy exists on a continuum; (2) varied decision-making processes for COVID-19 vaccination; (3) motivators among vaccinated individuals; (4) barriers among unvaccinated individuals; (5) retrieving and navigating vaccine information within the COVID-19 infodemic; and (6) parent perspectives on child vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that vaccinated and unvaccinated participants had similar and dissimilar perspectives in decision-making processes and vaccine concerns as shown in the Decision-making Processes for the COVID-19 vaccination (DePC) model. Based on these findings, future studies should further explore how factors influencing decision-making can lead to divergent outcomes for COVID-19 vaccination.

Using narratives to inform the development of a digital health intervention related to COVID-19 vaccination in Black young adults in Georgia, North Carolina and Alabama

Interactive stories are a relatively newer form of storytelling with great potential to correct misinformation while increasing self-efficacy, which is crucial to vaccine acceptance. To address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and medical mistrust in young Black adults (BYA), we sought to adapt a pre-existing application ("app"; Tough Talks) designed to address HIV disclosure decision-making through choose-your-own adventure (CYOA) narratives and other activities. The adapted app (Tough Talks - COVID) uses a similar approach to situate COVID-19 vaccination decision-making within social contexts and to encourage greater deliberation about decisions. To inform content for the CYOA narratives, we conducted an online survey that was used to elicit the behavioral, cognitive, and environmental determinants influencing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among 150 BYA (ages 18-29) in Georgia, Alabama, and North Carolina. The survey included scenario questions that were developed with input from a youth advisory board to understand responses to peer and family influences. In two scenarios that involved discussions with family and friends about vaccination status, most respondents chose to be honest about their vaccination status. However, vaccinated individuals perceived more social pressure and stigma about not being vaccinated than unvaccinated respondents who were not as motivated by social pressure. Personal choice/agency in the face of perceived vaccine risks was a more common theme for unvaccinated respondents. Results suggest that relying on changing social norms alone may not impact barriers to vaccination in unvaccinated young adults without also addressing other barriers to vaccination such as concerns about autonomy and vaccine safety. Based on these findings, CYOA narratives in the app were adapted to include discussions with family and friends but also to touch on themes of personal choice as well as other topics that influence behaviors besides norms such as safety, side effects, and risk of COVID-19 in an evolving pandemic.

Prevalence and Assessment of Factors Associated with COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in an Ethnic Minority Oncology Patient Population

BACKGROUND

Complicating the COVID-19 pandemic are the healthcare disparities experienced by ethnic minorities, especially those with comorbidities including cancer. The introduction of COVID-19 vaccines has been instrumental in blunting the morbidity and mortality from the pandemic; however, vaccine hesitancy, particularly among ethnic minorities, has been a major concern. Thus, we sought to evaluate the knowledge and perspectives of COVID-19 and vaccines among our ethnic minority cancer patient population.

METHODS

Following an IRB approved protocol, questionnaires were completed by patients in a predominantly ethnic minority population at a single institution between 1 February and 30 June 2021. Included were any adult cancer patients with either a solid or hematologic malignancy.

RESULTS

Among the 84 patients that were offered the questionnaires, 52 patients responded, with a median age of 63.5 years. Overall, 36% were non-Hispanic Blacks and 30% were Hispanics; 65% were receiving active treatment for their cancer. Seventy-nine percent believed COVID-19 to be dangerous or harmful to them, 61% were concerned about the side effects, yet 65% considered COVID-19 vaccines as safe. Among the seven patients that refused the vaccine, (71%, n = 5) cited side effects and/or (57%, n = 4) believed that the vaccine was not needed. Overall, there was a significantly higher chance of being vaccinated if patients were receiving active cancer treatment, believed COVID-19 was harmful, or that the vaccine was safe, and knew COVID-19 was a virus.

CONCLUSIONS

This exploratory study demonstrates that most ethnic minority cancer patients are receptive to vaccines, with a majority being vaccinated. However, we also discovered various reasons why this group of patients may not want be vaccinated, including concerns about side effects and perception that COVID-19 is not harmful. These findings can help us further understand the complex nature of vaccine hesitancy in ethnic minority cancer patients, and aid in developing future vaccine awareness strategies as the COVID-19 pandemic continues to evolve.

Digital Storytelling Methods to Empower Young Black Adults in COVID-19 Vaccination Decision-Making: Feasibility Study and Demonstration

BACKGROUND

Despite high rates of novel COVID-19, acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination is low among Black adults. In response, we developed a digital health intervention (Tough Talks-COVID) that includes digital stories created in a workshop we held with young Black adults.

OBJECTIVE

Our formative research using digital storytelling workshops asked 3 research questions: (1) What issues did participants have in conceptualizing their stories, and what themes emerged from the stories they created? (2) What issues did participants have related to production techniques, and which techniques were utilized in stories? and (3) Overall, how did participants evaluate their workshop experience?

METHODS

Participants were workshop-eligible if they were vaccine-accepting based on a baseline survey fielded in late 2021. Final participants (N=11) completed a consent process, all 3 workshops, and a media release form for their digital story. The first 2 workshops provided background information and hands-on digital storytelling skills from pre- to postproduction. The third workshop served as a screening and feedback session for participants' final videos. Qualitative and quantitative feedback elements were incorporated into all 3 sessions.

RESULTS

Digital stories addressed one or more of 4 broad themes: (1) COVID-19 vulnerability, (2) community connections, (3) addressing vaccine hesitancy, and (4) countering vaccine misinformation. Participants incorporated an array of technical approaches, including unique creative elements such as cartoon images and instant messaging tools to convey social interactions around COVID-19 decision-making. Most (9/11, 82%) strongly agreed the digital storytelling workshops were delivered as expected; 10 of 11 agreed (n=5) or strongly agreed (n=5) that they had some ideas about what story to tell by the end of the first workshop, and most (8/11, 73%) strongly agreed they had narrowed down their ideas by workshop two. Of the participants, 9 felt they would very likely (n=6) or likely (n=3) use digital storytelling techniques for personal use in the future, and even more were very likely (n=7) to use the techniques for professional use.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study is one of the first to incorporate digital storytelling as a central component to a digital health intervention and the only one to do so with exclusive focus on young Black adults. Our emphasis on digital storytelling was shown to be highly acceptable. Similar approaches, including careful consideration of the ethical challenges of community-based participatory approaches, are applicable to other populations experiencing both COVID-19 inequities and marginalization, such as other age demographics and people of color.