Informing efforts beyond tailored promotional campaigns by understanding contextual factors shaping vaccine hesitancy among equity-deserving populations in Canada: an exploratory qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy exists on a continuum ranging between complete adherence and complete refusal due to doubts or concerns within a heterogeneous group of individuals. Despite widespread acknowledgement of the contextual factors influencing attitudes and beliefs shaping COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, qualitative research with equity-deserving groups, accounting for unique lived experiences, remains a gap in the literature. We aim to identify and begin to understand and document the unique contextual factors shaping hesitancy by equity-deserving groups as it relates to relationships with government and health authorities. METHODS: Participants were recruited and interviewed between Aug-Dec 2021. Semi-structured interviews using a convergent interviewing technique were conducted with individuals from the general population, as well as individuals who identify as First Nations, Métis, or Inuit, members of the LGBT2SQ + community, low-income Canadians, Black Canadians, and newcomers. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed by a team of researchers. Memos were written following interviews and used to complement the thematic analysis of the interview data. Themes are presented in the results section. RESULTS: The rationale for hesitancy among equity-deserving groups is consistent with literature documenting hesitancy in the general population. Contextual factors surrounding equity-deserving groups' attitudes and beliefs, however, are unique and relate to a history of oppression, discrimination, and genocide. We identified factors unique to subgroups; for example, religious or fatalistic beliefs among participant who identify as FNMI, fear associated with lack of testing and speed of vaccines' production among participants who identify as FNMI, Black, and LGBT2SQ + , distrust of the healthcare system for LGBT2SQ + and Black Canadians, and distrust of the government and opposition to vaccine mandates for participating who identify as LGBT2SQ + , low-income, FNMI, or Black Canadian. Newcomers stood out as very trusting of the government and accepting of COVID-19 vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: While our data on vaccine hesitancy largely mirror concerns reported in the vast body of literature citing rationale for COVID-19 hesitancy in high-income countries, the contextual factors identified in our work point to the need for wider systemic change. Our results may be used to support efforts, beyond tailored promotion campaigns, to support the confident acceptance of vaccines for COVID-19 and the acceptance of novel vaccines as future infectious diseases emerge.

"Ultimately, the choice is theirs": Informed choice vaccine conversations and Canadian midwives.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, vaccination that protects against pertussis and influenza is recommended in every pregnancy, but uptake remains low. Communicating the risks and benefits of vaccination is key to clinical conversations about vaccination, which may influence the uptake of pregnancy and subsequent infant vaccines. Canadian midwives use an informed choice model of care, which is distinct from informed consent and prioritizes client autonomy in decision-making. METHODS: Using institutional ethnography, which treats lived experience as expertise, we aimed to understand how Canadian midwives, governed by intersecting professional standards and regulations, navigate vaccine discussions with their clients. We conducted interviews with individuals involved in midwifery training, regulation, and continuing education, as well as key public health professionals with expertise in immunization training. Following the phases of thematic analysis outlined by Braun and Clarke, data were analyzed holistically, emergent themes identified, and coding categories developed. RESULTS: Two types of confidence emerged as important to midwives' ability to conduct a thoroughly informed choice discussion about vaccines: confidence in vaccination itself (vaccine confidence), and confidence in vaccine knowledge and counseling skills (vaccine counseling confidence). A deferred or shortened vaccine discussion could be the result of either vaccine hesitancy or counseling hesitancy. DISCUSSION: Currently, available clinical communication tools and recommended techniques for addressing vaccine hesitancy do not always adapt well to the needs of midwives working to support clients' informed choice decisions. Our findings suggest that Canadian midwives require more and clearer resources on both the risks and benefits of vaccination in pregnancy.

Determinants of parental vaccine hesitancy in Canada: results from the 2017 Childhood National Immunization Coverage Survey.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) designated vaccine hesitancy as one of the ten leading threats to global health. Vaccine hesitancy exists when vaccination services are available and accessible, but vaccine uptake is lower than anticipated. It is often attributed to lack of trust in vaccine safety and effectiveness, or low level of concern about the risk of many vaccine-preventable diseases. This study aimed to examine the sociodemographic factors associated with parental vaccine hesitancy and vaccine refusal in Canada using data from the 2017 Childhood National Immunization Coverage Survey (CNICS). METHOD: The 2017 CNICS was a cross-sectional and nationally representative survey to estimate national vaccine uptake and to collect information about parents' Knowledge, Attitudes and Beliefs (KAB) regarding vaccination. Using the KAB questions, parental vaccine hesitancy (i.e., parental hesitation, delay or refusal of at least one recommended vaccination) and refusal (i.e., unvaccinated children) by sociodemographic factors was estimated using weighted prevalence proportions. A multinomial logistic regression model was fitted to examine associations between parental vaccine hesitancy or refusal and sociodemographic factors among parents of two-year-old children in Canada. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of being vaccine-hesitant or vaccine-refusing versus being non-vaccine-hesitant were generated. RESULTS: Both unadjusted and adjusted logistic regressions models showed that parents with lower household income (aOR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.5), and those with a higher number of children in the household (aOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4-3.5) had higher vaccine hesitancy. Conversely, lower vaccine hesitancy was observed among non-immigrant parents (aOR 0.4, 95% CI 0.3-0.6). In addition, lower household income (aOR 4.0, 95% CI 1.3-12.9), and higher number of children in the household (aOR 6.9, 95% CI 2.1-22.9) were significantly associated with parental vaccine refusal. Regional variations were also observed. CONCLUSION: Several sociodemographic determinants are associated with parental vaccine hesitancy and refusal. The findings of the study could help public health officials and policymakers to develop and implement targeted interventions to improve childhood vaccination programs.

How is the COVID-19 pandemic impacting our life, mental health, and well-being? Design and preliminary findings of the pan-Canadian longitudinal COHESION study.

BACKGROUND: With the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person social interactions and opportunities for accessing resources that sustain health and well-being have drastically reduced. We therefore designed the pan-Canadian prospective COVID-19: HEalth and Social Inequities across Neighbourhoods (COHESION) cohort to provide a deeper understanding of how the COVID-19 pandemic context affects mental health and well-being, key determinants of health, and health inequities. METHODS: This paper presents the design of the two-phase COHESION Study, and descriptive results from the first phase conducted between May 2020 and September 2021. During that period, the COHESION research platform collected monthly data linked to COVID-19 such as infection and vaccination status, perceptions and attitudes regarding pandemic-related measures, and information on participants' physical and mental health, well-being, sleep, loneliness, resilience, substances use, living conditions, social interactions, activities, and mobility. RESULTS: The 1,268 people enrolled in the Phase 1 COHESION Study are for the most part from Ontario (47%) and Quebec (33%), aged 48 ± 16 years [mean ± standard deviation (SD)], and mainly women (78%), White (85%), with a university degree (63%), and living in large urban centers (70%). According to the 298 ± 68 (mean ± SD) prospective questionnaires completed each month on average, the first year of follow-up reveals significant temporal variations in standardized indexes of well-being, loneliness, anxiety, depression, and psychological distress. CONCLUSIONS: The COHESION Study will allow identifying trajectories of mental health and well-being while investigating their determinants and how these may vary by subgroup, over time, and across different provinces in Canada, in varying context including the pandemic recovery period. Our findings will contribute valuable insights to the urban health field and inform future public health interventions.

The CONFIDENT study protocol: a randomized controlled trial comparing two methods to increase long-term care worker confidence in the COVID-19 vaccines.

BACKGROUND: Clinical and real-world effectiveness data for the COVID-19 vaccines have shown that they are the best defense in preventing severe illness and death throughout the pandemic. However, in the US, some groups remain more hesitant than others about receiving COVID-19 vaccines. One important group is long-term care workers (LTCWs), especially because they risk infecting the vulnerable and clinically complex populations they serve. There is a lack of research about how best to increase vaccine confidence, especially in frontline LTCWs and healthcare staff. Our aims are to: (1) compare the impact of two interventions delivered online to enhanced usual practice on LTCW COVID-19 vaccine confidence and other pre-specified secondary outcomes, (2) determine if LTCWs' characteristics and other factors mediate and moderate the interventions' effect on study outcomes, and (3) explore the implementation characteristics, contexts, and processes needed to sustain a wider use of the interventions. METHODS: We will conduct a three-arm randomized controlled effectiveness-implementation hybrid (type 2) trial, with randomization at the participant level. Arm 1 is a dialogue-based webinar intervention facilitated by a LTCW and a medical expert and guided by an evidence-based COVID-19 vaccine decision tool. Arm 2 is a curated social media web application intervention featuring interactive, dynamic content about COVID-19 and relevant vaccines. Arm 3 is enhanced usual practice, which directs participants to online public health information about COVID-19 vaccines. Participants will be recruited via online posts and advertisements, email invitations, and in-person visits to care settings. Trial data will be collected at four time points using online surveys. The primary outcome is COVID-19 vaccine confidence. Secondary outcomes include vaccine uptake, vaccine and booster intent for those unvaccinated, likelihood of recommending vaccination (both initial series and booster), feeling informed about the vaccines, identification of vaccine information and misinformation, and trust in COVID-19 vaccine information provided by different people and organizations. Exploration of intervention implementation will involve interviews with study participants and other stakeholders, an in-depth process evaluation, and testing during a subsequent sustainability phase. DISCUSSION: Study findings will contribute new knowledge about how to increase COVID-19 vaccine confidence and effective informational modalities for LTCWs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05168800 at ClinicalTrials.gov, registered December 23, 2021.

Vaccination barriers and drivers in Romania: a focused ethnographic study.

BACKGROUND: In 2016-18, a large measles outbreak occurred in Romania identified by pockets of sub-optimally vaccinated population groups in the country. The aim of the current study was to gain insight into barriers and drivers from the experience of measles vaccination from the perspectives of caregivers and their providers. METHODS: Data were collected by non-participant observation of vaccination consultations and individual interviews with health workers and caregivers in eight Romanian clinics with high or low measles vaccination uptake. Romanian stakeholders were involved in all steps of the study. The findings of this study were discussed during a workshop with key stakeholders. RESULTS: Over 400 h of observation and 161 interviews were conducted. A clear difference was found between clinics with high and low measles vaccination uptake which indicates that being aware of and following recommended practices for both vaccination service delivery and conveying vaccine recommendations to caregivers may have an impact on vaccine uptake. Barriers identified were related to shortcomings in following recommended practices for vaccination consultations by health workers (e.g. correctly assessing contraindications or providing enough information to allow an informed decision). These observations were largely confirmed in interviews with caregivers and revealed significant knowledge gaps. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of key barriers provided an opportunity to design specific interventions to improve vaccination service delivery (e.g. mobile vaccination clinics, use of an electronic vaccination registry system for scheduling of appointments) and build capacity among health workers (e.g. guidance and supporting materials and training programmes).

Newcomer perceptions of COVID-19 countermeasures in Canada.

Newcomers to Canada have been disproportionally affected by COVID-19, with higher rates of infection and severity of illness. Determinants of higher rates may relate to social and structural inequities that impact newcomers' capacity to follow countermeasures. Our aim was to describe and document factors shaping newcomers' acceptance of COVID-19 countermeasures. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with individuals living in Canada for <5 years. Participants were asked to discuss their pandemic experiences, and perceptions and acceptance of measures. Five themes were identified: (i) belief in the necessity and efficacy of countermeasures; (ii) negative impact of measures on health/wellbeing; (iii) existing barriers to newcomer settlement exacerbated by pandemic measures; (iv) countermeasure adherence related to immigration status and (v) past experiences shaping countermeasure acceptance. Government should continue to provide messaging regarding the importance of measures for individual and population heath and continue to demonstrate a commitment to the interests of citizens. Importantly, newcomer trust in government should not be taken for granted, as this trust is critical for the acceptance of government interventions now and moving forward. It will be important to ensure that newcomers are given support to overcome challenges to settlement that were intensified during the pandemic.

Parents' perceptions on COVID-19 vaccination as the new routine for their children ≤ 11 years old.

Canadian children 5-11 years old became eligible for COVID-19 vaccination on November 19, 2021, with eligibility for younger children expected later. We aimed to descriptively assess parents' COVID-19 vaccine intentions and acceptability of future doses, including co-administration and annual vaccination for their children. We conducted a cross-sectional Canadian online survey of parents from October 14-November 12, 2021, just prior to authorization of the pediatric formulation of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine for children aged 5-11 years. We assessed parents' intention to vaccinate their children aged 5-11 years, 2-4 years, and 6-23 months; reasons for their intention; and preferences for delivery and access to vaccines. Of 1129 parents, 56% intended to vaccinate their child aged 5-11 years against COVID-19; intentions were lower for children aged 6-23 months (41.9%) and 2-4 years (45.4%). Most parents who intended to vaccinate supported co-administration with routine (61.1%) or influenza (55.4%) vaccines, administration at school (63.6%), receipt of booster doses of COVID-19 vaccine (57.8%), and annual vaccination (56.4%) for their child. Despite parents' high COVID-19 vaccination uptake for themselves (88.8%), intentions for children aged 5-11 years was low. Currently, 56.9% of Canadian children aged 5-11 years have received one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, and only 37.1% are fully vaccinated. Given that intentions for children <5 years was lower than those 5-11 years, we can also expect low uptake in this group. Parents' preferences regarding delivery and access to COVID-19 vaccination should be considered by public health officials when planning vaccination strategies for children.

Do intentions lead to action? Results of a longitudinal study assessing determinants of Tdap vaccine uptake during pregnancy in Quebec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, vaccination against pertussis (Tdap) during pregnancy has been recommended since 2018, with suboptimal uptake. We aimed to assess the determinants of intention and uptake of Tdap vaccine among pregnant women in Quebec. METHODS: Participants (< 21 weeks of pregnancy) were recruited in four Quebec regions. Two online surveys were administered during pregnancy (< 21 weeks and > 35 weeks). One measured vaccination intention and the other assessed the actual decision. Questionnaires were informed by the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). We used logistic multivariate analysis to identify determinants of Tdap vaccination uptake during pregnancy using responses to both questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 741 women answered the first survey and 568 (76.7%), the second survey. In the first survey most participants intended to receive the Tdap vaccine during their pregnancy (76.3%) and in the second survey, 82.4% reported having been vaccinated against Tdap during their pregnancy. In multivariate analysis, the main determinants of vaccine uptake were: a recommendation from a healthcare provider (OR = 7.6), vaccine intention (OR = 6.12), social norms (or thinking that most pregnant women will be vaccinated (OR = 3.81), recruitment site (OR = 3.61 for General Family Medicine unit) perceived behavioral control (or low perceived barriers to access vaccination services, (OR = 2.32) and anticipated feeling of guilt if not vaccinated (OR = 2.13). Safety concerns were the main reason for not intending or not receiving the vaccine during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: We observed high vaccine acceptance and uptake of pertussis vaccine in pregnancy. The core components of the TPB (intention, social norms and perceived behavioral control) were all predictors of vaccine uptake, but our multivariate analysis also showed that other determinants were influential: being sufficiently informed about Tdap vaccination, not having vaccine safety concerns, and anticipated regret if unvaccinated. To ensure high vaccine acceptance and uptake in pregnancy, strong recommendations by trusted healthcare providers and ease of access to vaccination services remain instrumental.

Measuring inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake and intent: results from the Canadian Community Health Survey 2021.

BACKGROUND: By July 2021, Canada had received enough COVID-19 vaccines to fully vaccinate every eligible Canadian. However, despite the availability of vaccines, some eligible individuals remain unvaccinated. Differences in vaccination uptake can be driven by health inequalities which have been exacerbated and amplified by the pandemic. This study aims to assess inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake and intent in adults 18 years or older across Canada by identifying sociodemographic factors associated with non-vaccination and low vaccination intent using data drawn from the June to August 2021 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS). METHODS: The CCHS is an annual cross-sectional and nationally representative survey conducted by Statistics Canada, which collects health-related information. Since September 2020, questions about the COVID-19 pandemic are asked. Adjusted logistic regression models were fitted to examine associations between vaccination uptake or intent and sociodemographic and health related variables. Region, age, gender, level of education, Indigenous status, visible minority status, perceived health status, and having a regular healthcare provider were considered as predictors, among other factors. RESULTS: The analysis included 9,509 respondents. The proportion of unvaccinated was 11%. Non-vaccination was associated with less than university education (aOR up to 3.5, 95% CI 2.1-6.1), living with children under 12 years old (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.4), not having a regular healthcare provider (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2), and poor self-perceived health (aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3-2.4). Only 5% of the population had low intention to get vaccinated. Being unlikely to get vaccinated was associated with the Prairies region (aOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.1), younger age groups (aOR up to 4.0, 95% CI 1.3-12.3), less than university education (aOR up to 3.8, 95% CI 1.9-7.6), not being part of a visible minority group (aOR 3.0, 95% CI 1.4-6.4), living with children under 12 years old (aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-2.9), unattached individuals (aOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1-6.1), and poor self-perceived health (aOR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3-2.9). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities were observed in vaccination uptake and intent among various sociodemographic groups. Awareness of inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake and intent is needed to determine the vaccination barriers to address in vaccination promotion strategies.

Sociodemographic Disparities in COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake and Vaccination Intent in Canada.

Introduction: This study's objective was to examine sociodemographic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake and vaccination intent in the Canadian provinces by identifying factors associated with vaccine uptake in seniors prioritized for vaccination at the time of the survey and vaccination intent in all adults. Data and methods: A cross-sectional survey of Canadian adults was conducted in all provinces from mid-April to mid-May 2021. In addition to sociodemographic characteristics, respondents (n=10,678) provided information on their COVID-19 vaccination status or their intent to get vaccinated. Logistic regression models were fitted using sociodemographic factors as explanatory variables and vaccination status (unvaccinated vs at least one dose) or vaccination intent (unlikely versus likely or already vaccinated) as outcomes. To account for vaccine prioritization groups, multiple regression models were adjusted for province of residence, age, Indigenous identity and health care worker status. Results: Seniors with a lower household income (less than $60,000) and those living in smaller communities (fewer than 100,000 inhabitants) had higher odds of being unvaccinated. Among Canadian adults, the odds of being unlikely to get vaccinated were higher for males (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.3), individuals younger than 60 (AOR between 3.3 and 5.1), non-health care workers (AOR 3.3), those with less than a high school education (AOR 3.4) or a household income of less than $30,000 (AOR 2.7) and individuals who do not identify as South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Arab, Latin American, Southeast Asian, West Asian, Korean or Japanese (AOR 1.7). Interpretation: COVID-19 vaccine uptake (80%) and vaccination intent (95%) were high among Canadians; however, relative disparities were observed among specific groups. Continued efforts targeted toward these groups are essential in reducing potential inequity in access or service provision.

Vaccine Hesitancy, Acceptance, and Anti-Vaccination: Trends and Future Prospects for Public Health.

An often-stated public health comment is that "vaccination is a victim of its own success." While the scientific and medical consensus on the benefits of vaccination is clear and unambiguous, an increasing number of people are perceiving vaccines as unsafe and unnecessary. The World Health Organization identified "the reluctance or refusal to vaccinate despite availability of vaccines" as one of the 10 threats to global health in 2019. The negative influence of anti-vaccination movements is often named as a cause of increasing vaccine resistance in the public. In this review, we give an overview of the current literature on the topic, beginning by agreeing on terminology and concepts before looking at potential causes, consequences, and impacts of resistance to vaccination.

Attitudes of healthcare workers towards COVID-19 vaccination: a survey in France and French-speaking parts of Belgium and Canada, 2020.

In October and November 2020, we conducted a survey of 2,678 healthcare workers (HCWs) involved in general population immunisation in France, French-speaking Belgium and Quebec, Canada to assess acceptance of future COVID-19 vaccines (i.e. willingness to receive or recommend these) and its determinants. Of the HCWs, 48.6% (n = 1,302) showed high acceptance, 23.0% (n = 616) moderate acceptance and 28.4% (n = 760) hesitancy/reluctance. Hesitancy was mostly driven by vaccine safety concerns. These must be addressed before/during upcoming vaccination campaigns.

Beyond fragmentary: A proposed measure for travel vaccination concerns.

The travel medicine literature points to travelers' concerns as significant promoters of their under-vaccinations. Therefore, this study researches the hitherto understudied concept of vaccination concern and its theoretical scope in the international travel space. It attempts a conceptualization of the concept by delimiting its theoretical scope and proposes a measure for it. An exploratory sequential mixed-methods design was used to conduct four interlocking studies using data from a netnography, field interviews, and surveys among varied international travelers. A scale with six dimensions, comprising safety, efficacy, cost, time, access, and autonomy concerns were revealed. The scale significantly explained mainstream and segments-based tourists' uptake attitudes and behavior for their eligible vaccines. The findings suggest that anti-travel vax sentiments and public vax sentiments despite conceptually similar are considerably distinct. The broad nature of the scale and its prediction of travelers' vaccine uptake make it clinically relevant for tracking and resolving concerns for increased vaccine uptake.

A Web Application About Herd Immunity Using Personalized Avatars: Development Study.

BACKGROUND: Herd immunity or community immunity refers to the reduced risk of infection among susceptible individuals in a population through the presence and proximity of immune individuals. Recent studies suggest that improving the understanding of community immunity may increase intentions to get vaccinated. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to design a web application about community immunity and optimize it based on users' cognitive and emotional responses. METHODS: Our multidisciplinary team developed a web application about community immunity to communicate epidemiological evidence in a personalized way. In our application, people build their own community by creating an avatar representing themselves and 8 other avatars representing people around them, for example, their family or coworkers. The application integrates these avatars in a 2-min visualization showing how different parameters (eg, vaccine coverage, and contact within communities) influence community immunity. We predefined communication goals, created prototype visualizations, and tested four iterative versions of our visualization in a university-based human-computer interaction laboratory and community-based settings (a cafeteria, two shopping malls, and a public library). Data included psychophysiological measures (eye tracking, galvanic skin response, facial emotion recognition, and electroencephalogram) to assess participants' cognitive and affective responses to the visualization and verbal feedback to assess their interpretations of the visualization's content and messaging. RESULTS: Among 110 participants across all four cycles, 68 (61.8%) were women and 38 (34.5%) were men (4/110, 3.6%; not reported), with a mean age of 38 (SD 17) years. More than half (65/110, 59.0%) of participants reported having a university-level education. Iterative changes across the cycles included adding the ability for users to create their own avatars, specific signals about who was represented by the different avatars, using color and movement to indicate protection or lack of protection from infectious disease, and changes to terminology to ensure clarity for people with varying educational backgrounds. Overall, we observed 3 generalizable findings. First, visualization does indeed appear to be a promising medium for conveying what community immunity is and how it works. Second, by involving multiple users in an iterative design process, it is possible to create a short and simple visualization that clearly conveys a complex topic. Finally, evaluating users' emotional responses during the design process, in addition to their cognitive responses, offers insights that help inform the final design of an intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Visualization with personalized avatars may help people understand their individual roles in population health. Our app showed promise as a method of communicating the relationship between individual behavior and community health. The next steps will include assessing the effects of the application on risk perception, knowledge, and vaccination intentions in a randomized controlled trial. This study offers a potential road map for designing health communication materials for complex topics such as community immunity.

Socioeconomic status differences in parental immunization attitudes and child immunization in Canada: Findings from the 2013 Childhood National Immunization Coverage Survey (CNICS).

Childhood vaccination efforts in Canada have been negatively impacted by parents' vaccine hesitancy based on their knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs (KAB) about vaccinations. Less understood is the extent to which child vaccination receipt and KAB vary by parents' socioeconomic status (SES). Analyzing different age groups of children and vaccinations, we examine the extent to which (a) family SES (parent education, household income) is a determinant of Canadian parents' vaccination KAB and child vaccination receipt, and (b) whether SES was indirectly associated with receipt via KAB. In 2017, we analyzed 2013 Childhood National Immunization Coverage Survey (CNICS) data. We estimated models for parental KAB and child vaccination receipt for measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) at age 2 (n = 3620); diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus (DPT) at age 7 (n = 3465); and human papillomavirus (HPV) at ages 12-14 (n = 5213 females). SES is inconsistently associated with KAB and vaccine receipt across the three age groups. SES differences in KAB mostly center on vaccine-specific side effect and safety concerns, with lower education and income levels associated with higher odds of being concerned. Non-receipt of minimum age-specific vaccination dosages was associated with concerns about vaccine effectiveness (DPT, HPV) and side effects (MMR, HPV) and lower perceived importance of immunizing a child (MMR, HPV). KAB mediation was mostly limited to SES patterns in MMR. We discuss the implications of these findings for designing general and population-specific vaccination education strategies and future studies of KAB and undervaccination.

Systematic review searches must be systematic, comprehensive, and transparent: a critique of Perman et al.

A high quality systematic review search has three core attributes; it is systematic, comprehensive, and transparent. The current over-emphasis on the primacy of systematic reviews over other forms of literature review in health research, however, runs the risk of encouraging publication of reviews whose searches do not meet these three criteria under the guise of being systematic reviews. This correspondence comes in response to Perman S, Turner S, Ramsay AIG, Baim-Lance A, Utley M, Fulop NJ. School-based vaccination programmes: a systematic review of the evidence on organization and delivery in high income countries. 2017; BMC Public Health 17:252, which we assert did not meet these three important quality criteria for systematic reviews, thereby leading to potentially unreliable conclusions. Our aims herein are to emphasize the importance of maintaining a high degree of rigour in the conduct and publication of systematic reviews that may be used by clinicians and policy-makers to guide or alter practice or policy, and to highlight and discuss key evidence omitted in the published review in order to contextualize the findings for readers. By consulting a research librarian, we identified limitations in the search terms, the number and type of databases, and the screening methods used by Perman et al. Using a revised Ovid MEDLINE search strategy, we identified an additional 1016 records in that source alone, and highlighted relevant literature on the organization and delivery of school-based immunization program that was omitted as a result. We argue that a number of the literature gaps noted by Perman et al. may well be addressed by existing literature found through a more systematic and comprehensive search and screening strategy. We commend both the journal and the authors, however, for their transparency in supplying information about the search strategy and providing open access to peer reviewer and editor's comments, which enabled us to understand the reasons for the limitations of that review.

Promoting vaccination in the province of Québec: the PromoVaQ randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination has a huge public health impact. Maintaining vaccine coverage is key to avoid the devastating consequences of resurgence. In the Province of Québec, vaccine coverage in young children are sub-optimal, mostly due to ambivalence toward vaccine safety and efficacy. We previously conducted a regional study in the Québec's Eastern Townships region, the PromoVac Study, to test a new educational intervention, based on motivational interviewing techniques, aimed at promoting infant vaccination. This first study evidenced that the intervention led to a marked increase in mothers' intention to vaccinate, and vaccine coverage in their infants. The current study protocol aims at scaling up these results at a provincial level using a randomized controlled trial design. METHODS: This pragmatic, randomized, controlled, parallel-group clinical trial will compare the effectiveness of the motivational interviewing to an educational intervention, including the distribution of an information flyer as standard of care on vaccination coverage in four maternity wards across the Province of Québec (PromovaQ). Adult mothers of children born in participating maternity wards were recruited between March 2014 and February 2015. Vaccination coverage will be assessed at 3-years of age, thus the trial is expected to be completed in March 2019. Statistical analyses will be conducted under the intention-to-treat principle. Vaccine coverage will be analyzed using Chi-squared distribution testing and logistic regression to identify determinant factors. Secondary outcomes will include vaccine hesitation and intention scores, mother's knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about immunization, and psychosocial determinants of intention to vaccinate. DISCUSSION: In the case results of this Provincial RCT be confirmed, serious consideration should then be given by Ministry of Health authorities to the possible implementation of MI-based strategies across provincial maternity wards. To ensure adequate input and secure implementation, study design and results will be reviewed with relevant stakeholders, including the children's families, and provincial and regional decision-makers. Results will be adapted and shared with all stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02666872 (Retrospectively registered as January 28, 2016).

Vaccination Against Influenza in Pregnancy: A Survey of Canadian Maternity Care Providers.

OBJECTIVE: Influenza vaccine uptake among Canadian pregnant individuals is suboptimal. Failure to incorporate vaccination into routine prenatal care and a lack of recommendations from healthcare providers are recognized as barriers to vaccination. The aim of this study was to assess Canadian maternity care providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding influenza vaccination in pregnancy. METHODS: A cross-sectional Web-based questionnaire was sent during July and August 2017 to family physicians, obstetricians-gynaecologists, midwives, pharmacists, and nurses who care for pregnant individuals. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to determine variables independently associated with providers' recommendation of the influenza vaccine in pregnancy. RESULTS: The analysis included 1061 providers. Most participants (85%) reported being vaccinated against influenza themselves, and 72% reported recommending the influenza vaccine to all of their pregnant patients during the previous influenza season. Participants' attitudes regarding influenza vaccination during pregnancy were generally positive: 64% strongly agreed that pregnant individuals are at an increased risk of complications from influenza, and 69% strongly agreed that it is safe to vaccinate pregnant individuals against influenza. The main determinants of participants' recommendations for influenza vaccination to all pregnant patients were following official recommendations on influenza vaccination, discussing vaccines with most or all pregnant individuals seen in their practice, and being vaccinated themselves during the previous influenza season. CONCLUSION: Enhancing influenza vaccine uptake in pregnancy is largely dependent on maternity care providers' recommendations. This study provides valuable insight on providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices.