Between Healthcare Practitioners and Clergy: Evangelicals and COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy

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.

Why religion and spirituality are important in human biological research

The study of human biology includes exploration of all the genetic and environmental influences on human variation and life history, including impacts of sociocultural and physical environments. Religious practice and spirituality may be one of these influences. There are more than 5.8 billion religiously affiliated adults and children, accounting for 84% of the world's 6.9 billion people. Furthermore, 70% of Americans consider themselves spiritual in some way, including 22% who do not consider themselves religious, and the numbers for Europe are lower but proportionally similar. Such a high rate of religious affiliation and spiritual belief suggests that religion and spirituality could be sociocultural influences on human variation, but human biologists have scarcely attended to their impacts, as indicated by the limited numbers of relevant articles in the two flagship human biology journals. In this article, we discuss why human biologists may have overlooked this important force for human variability and highlight foundational work from human biology and other disciplines that can give our colleagues directions forward. We review the impacts of religion and spirituality at population and individual levels and call for human biologists to attend to the many aspects of religion and spirituality that can impact human biology and are much more than simply influences of denominational affiliation.

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.

Ethical and Legal Debates on Vaccine Infodemics

Over the course of three and a half years, the global toll of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has claimed the lives of millions of individuals. Scientific breakthroughs, exemplified by mRNA vaccines, have emerged as crucial tools in saving numerous lives and fortifying our defenses against future pandemics. However, the battle against the virus has been complicated by the dissemination of misleading political and ethical information, resulting in avoidable fatalities. Recognizing this phenomenon, the term 'infodemics' has been coined to denote the proliferation of false or misleading information that hinders effective social responses. Given the historical prevalence of infodemics surrounding vaccinations, this discussion delves into the ongoing ethical and legal deliberations concerning vaccination mandates, an indispensable health intervention in the face of pandemics. Governments bear the responsibility of safeguarding their citizens, acknowledging the social requirements imposed by the collective well-being. The protection of both citizens and healthcare workers becomes paramount, considering the potential risks of infection and mortality associated with individuals refusing vaccination. Historically, governments have played a pivotal role in eradicating pandemics through the implementation of vaccine mandates. However, the contemporary landscape is marked by the infusion of political and misleading misinformation, presenting new challenges. Governments are now confronted with an ethical duty to ensure that citizens possess the necessary information to make informed decisions and safeguard their well-being. While grappling with the realization that extraordinary circumstances demand extraordinary responses, the lessons from past pandemics underscore the imperative of prioritizing public health, especially in the context of the high numbers of casualties worldwide. This discourse explores the ethical and legal dimensions surrounding vaccine mandates, with particular emphasis on their relevance to healthcare workers.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on parental vaccine hesitancy: A cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

It is unclear how hesitancy towards pediatric vaccines has changed quantitatively since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and if changes are more readily apparent in clusters of low COVID-19 vaccination. In this study, we assess how clusters of low COVID-19 vaccination correlate with changing parental beliefs about childhood vaccines.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, opt-in, internet-based survey of parents resident in the U.S. was conducted during August-September 2022. Our survey measured changes in beliefs about childhood vaccine safety, importance, and effectiveness since the start of COVID-19. We also measured parents' perceived vaccination rates in the community, assessing its relationship with changing vaccination perceptions using Rao-Scott chi-square tests, and multinomial logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Among 310 parents of children 0-17 years old, 11 % (95 % CI: 7 %, 15 %) believed that childhood vaccines are less safe, 12 % (95 % CI: 8 %, 17 %) less important, and 13 % (95 % CI: 9 %, 18 %) less effective since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. About 9 % (95 % CI: 5 %, 12 %) stated COVID-19 vaccination coverage was low in their community. Among those who stated COVID-19 vaccination coverage was low, 38 % reported believing childhood vaccines were less effective (vs 12 % of those who stated vaccination coverage was high). This corresponds to 4.34 times greater odds of believing childhood vaccines were less effective since the start of the pandemic (95 % CI: 1.38, 13.73) in those who believe COVID-19 vaccination coverage to be low in their community vs high.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates that parental perceptions about childhood vaccines have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic through geographic and social clustering of non-vaccination. Beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccine have spillover with beliefs about childhood vaccines, and more negative beliefs may be clustering in areas with low vaccination coverage, which could predispose the area to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease.

How Well the Constructs of Health Belief Model Predict Vaccination Intention: A Systematic Review on COVID-19 Primary Series and Booster Vaccines

This systematic review synthesizes the findings of quantitative studies examining the relationships between Health Belief Model (HBM) constructs and COVID-19 vaccination intention. We searched PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and identified 109 eligible studies. The overall vaccination intention rate was 68.19%. Perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and cues to action were the three most frequently demonstrated predictors of vaccination intention for both primary series and booster vaccines. For booster doses, the influence of susceptibility slightly increased, but the impact of severity, self-efficacy, and cues to action on vaccination intention declined. The impact of susceptibility increased, but severity's effect declined sharply from 2020 to 2022. The influence of barriers slightly declined from 2020 to 2021, but it skyrocketed in 2022. Conversely, the role of self-efficacy dipped in 2022. Susceptibility, severity, and barriers were dominant predictors in Saudi Arabia, but self-efficacy and cues to action had weaker effects in the USA. Susceptibility and severity had a lower impact on students, especially in North America, and barriers had a lower impact on health care workers. However, cues to action and self-efficacy had a dominant influence among parents. The most prevalent modifying variables were age, gender, education, income, and occupation. The results show that HBM is useful in predicting vaccine intention.