Institutional trust is a distinct construct related to vaccine hesitancy and refusal.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy is driven by a heterogeneous and changing set of psychological, social and historical phenomena, requiring multidisciplinary approaches to its study and intervention. Past research has brought to light instances of both interpersonal and institutional trust playing an important role in vaccine uptake. However, no comprehensive study to date has specifically assessed the relative importance of these two categories of trust as they relate to vaccine behaviors and attitudes. METHODS: In this paper, we examine the relationship between interpersonal and institutional trust and four measures related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and one measure related to general vaccine hesitancy. We hypothesize that, across measures, individuals with vaccine hesitant attitudes and behaviors have lower trust-especially in institutions-than those who are not hesitant. We test this hypothesis in a sample of 1541 Canadians. RESULTS: A deficit in both interpersonal and institutional trust was associated with higher levels of vaccine hesitant attitudes and behaviors. However, institutional trust was significantly lower than interpersonal trust in those with high hesitancy scores, suggesting that the two types of trust can be thought of as distinct constructs in the context of vaccine hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we suggest that diminished institutional trust plays a crucial role in vaccine hesitancy. We propose that this may contribute to a tendency to instead place trust in interpersonally propagated belief systems, which may be more strongly misaligned with mainstream evidence and thus support vaccine hesitancy attitudes. We offer strategies rooted in these observations for creating public health messages designed to enhance vaccine uptake.

Mobile Health Fitness Interventions: Impact of Features on Routine Use and Data Sharing Acceptability.

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) interventions are increasingly being used for cardiovascular research and physical activity promotion. Objectives: As a result, the authors aimed to evaluate which features facilitate and impede routine engagement with mobile fitness applications. Methods: We distributed a pan-Canadian online questionnaire via the behavioral research platform Prolific.co to evaluate what features are associated with the use and routine engagement (ie, daily or weekly use) of mHealth fitness applications and attitudes about data sharing. Binary logistic regression was used to quantify the association between these endpoints and exploratory factors such as the perceived utility of various mHealth application features. Results: The survey received 694 responses. Most people were women (62%), the median age was 28 years (range: 18-78 years), and most people reported current use of an mHealth fitness application (48%). The perceived importance of personal health (OR: 2.40; 95% CI: 1.34-4.50) was the factor most associated with the current use of an mHealth fitness application. The feature most associated with routine engagement was the ability to track progress toward a goal (OR: 5.10; 95% CI: 2.73-9.61) while the most significant barrier was the absence of goal customization features (OR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.25-0.81). The acceptance of sharing health data for research was high (56%), and privacy concerns did not significantly affect routine engagement (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.40-1.77). Results were consistent across race and gender. Conclusions: mHealth interventions have the potential to be scaled across populations. Optimizing applications to improve self-monitoring and personalization could increase routine engagement and, thus, user retention and intervention effectiveness.