Learning from COVID-19: government leaders' perspectives to improve emergency risk communication.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the challenges of effective emergency risk communication (ERC) to protect public health, including the difficulty in tackling the spread of inaccurate information. This study aimed to understand those challenges and potential solutions by interviewing leading government spokespersons and their advisors from around the world with experience during large scale emergencies. Interviews were conducted with 27 individuals representing governments from 19 countries across five continents. Thematic analysis, using both a deductive and inductive approach, organized and identified salient themes and patterns that emerged from the interview data. RESULTS: The thematic analysis of the interviews' data led to the identification of 9 principles of communication: 1) Timeliness, 2) Transparency, 3) Coordination, 4) Accuracy and Consistency, 5) Accountability and Integrity, 6) Independence from politics, 7) Responsiveness, 8) Equity, 9) Trust and Empathy. We also developed 36 recommendations actionable by government agencies to enhance the practice of the 9 principles. Examples include the need for: proactive communication strategies, permanent communication task forces integrated into preparedness and response efforts, robust processes to enhance open discussion of controversial topics within government agencies, clarification of how various branches of government coordinate to oversee specific aspects of the overall communication, and development of relationships across public and private entities ahead of a crisis. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest key practical recommendations for leaders of government agencies to enhance ERC capabilities going forward. Before a crisis, they must constantly review internal processes and integrate ERC functions into overall communication planning efforts. During a crisis, they must coordinate roles and responsibilities across branches of governments, strive to communicate to a range of populations to uphold equity, maintain transparency by avoiding information voids on controversial issues and build trust by building relationships with a variety of community leaders. After a crisis, government agencies should continue the practice of social listening to hear more about the public's informational needs, strengthen civic participation processes, and understand how an always evolving information environment can best be leveraged during future crises.

Safety, Efficacy, and Ill Intent: Examining COVID-19 Vaccine Perceptions among the New Undervaccinated Moveable Middle in a U.S. Cohort, October 2022.

Individuals who received their primary vaccine series only (with no subsequent booster) may be a new type of "moveable middle" given their receipt of the original COVID-19 vaccination. One population within the moveable middle for whom tailored interventions may be needed is individuals with common mental disorders (CMD). The purpose of this paper is to understand the vaccine perceptions among this new moveable middle-the undervaccinated-and within the undervaccinated to examine the extent to which COVID-19 vaccine perceptions and motivations differ among those with and without symptoms of CMD. Using data from the CHASING COVID Cohort, we examine the relationship between vaccination status, CMD, and vaccine perceptions in the undervaccinated. Among 510 undervaccinated participants who had completed the primary vaccine series but were not boosted, the most common reasons for undervaccination focused on efficacy (not seeing a need for an additional dose, 42.4%; there not being enough evidence that a booster dose is effective, 26.5%; already having had COVID-19, 19.6%). Other concerns were related to safety (long-term side effects, 21.0%; short-term side effects, 17.6%) and logistics (plan to get a booster but haven't had time yet, 18.8%). Overall, the greatest vaccine concerns (over 30%) for the undervaccinated focused on efficacy and safety issues. Symptoms of depression or anxiety were associated with lower levels of vaccine efficacy and greater safety concerns in adjusted models. The implications of our study are that campaigns that are hoping to maximize vaccination uptake should consider focusing on and emphasizing messaging on efficacy and safety issues.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake, confidence and hesitancy in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa between April 2021 and April 2022: A continuous cross-sectional surveillance study.

High COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in South Africa limits protection against future epidemic waves. We evaluated how vaccine hesitancy and its correlates evolved April 2021-April 2022 in a well-characterized rural KwaZulu-Natal setting. All residents aged >15 in the Africa Health Research Institute's surveillance area were invited to complete a home-based, in-person interview. We described vaccine uptake and hesitancy trends, then evaluated associations with pre-existing personal factors, dynamic environmental context, and cues to action using ordinal logistic regression. Among 10,011 respondents, vaccine uptake rose as age-cohorts became vaccine-eligible before levelling off three months post-eligibility; younger age-groups had slower uptake and plateaued faster. Lifetime receipt of any COVID-19 vaccine rose from 3.0% in April-July 2021 to 32.9% in January-April 2022. Among 7,445 unvaccinated respondents, 47.7% said they would definitely take a free vaccine today in the first quarter of the study time period, falling to 32.0% in the last. By March/April 2022 only 48.0% of respondents were vaccinated or said they would definitely would take a vaccine. Predictors of lower vaccine hesitancy included being male (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-0.76), living with vaccinated household members (aOR:0.65, 95%CI: 0.59-0.71) and knowing someone who had had COVID-19 (aOR: 0.69, 95%CI: 0.59-0.80). Mistrust in government predicted greater hesitancy (aOR: 1.47, 95%CI: 1.42-1.53). Despite several COVID-19 waves, vaccine hesitancy was common in rural South Africa, rising over time and closely tied to mistrust in government. However, interpersonal experiences countered hesitancy and may be entry-points for interventions.

Cross-National Vaccine Concerns and Predictors of Vaccine Hesitancy in Not-Fully Vaccinated Individuals: Findings from USA, Canada, Sweden, and Italy.

Vaccine hesitancy is a key contributor to reduced COVID-19 vaccine uptake and remains a threat to COVID-19 mitigation strategies as many countries are rolling out the campaign for booster shots. The goal of our study is to identify and compare the top vaccine concerns in four countries: Canada, Italy, Sweden, and the USA and how these concerns relate to vaccine hesitancy. While most individuals in these countries are now vaccinated, we expect our results to be helpful in guiding vaccination efforts for additional doses, and more in general for other vaccines in the future. We sought to empirically test whether vaccine related concerns followed similar thematic issues in the four countries included in this study, and then to see how these themes related to vaccine hesitancy using data from a cross-sectional survey conducted in May 2021. We applied CFA and created vaccine concern scales for analysis. We then utilized these results in regression-based modeling to determine how concerns related to vaccine hesitancy and whether there were similar or different concerns by country. The results quantitatively highlight that the same vaccine related concerns permeated multiple countries at the same point in time. This implies that COVID-19 vaccination communications could benefit from global collaboration.