Views and perceptions of the public toward COVID-19 vaccine in Saudi Arabia.

Background: Numerous surveys studied individuals' decision to receive COVID-19 vaccine but the motives behind accepting or refusing COVID-19 vaccines are not yet fully understood. We aimed to more qualitatively explore the views and perceptions toward COVID-19 vaccines in Saudi Arabia to provide recommendations to mitigate the vaccine hesitancy issue. Methods: Open-ended interviews were conducted between October 2021-January 2022. The interview guide included questions about beliefs in vaccine efficacy and safety, and previous vaccination history. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and the content was analyzed using thematic analysis. Nineteen participants were interviewed. Results: All of the interviewees were vaccine acceptors; however, three participants were hesitant as they felt they were forced to receive it. Several themes emerged as the reasons to accept or refuse the vaccine. The key reasons behind vaccine acceptance were the sense of obligation to fulfill a governmental command, trust in the government decisions, vaccine availability, and the impact of family/friends. The main reason behind vaccine hesitancy was doubts regarding vaccine efficacy and safety and that vaccines were pre-invented, and the pandemic is made-up. Participants' sources of information included social media, official authorities, and family/friends. Conclusion: Findings from this study show that the convenience of receiving the vaccine, the abundance of credible information from the Saudi authorities, and the positive influence of family/friends were among the major factors that encouraged the public in Saudi Arabia to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Such results may inform future policies regarding encouraging the public to receive vaccines in cases of pandemic.

Assessing Health Consequences of Vitamin D Fortification Utilizing a Societal Experiment Design: Methodological Lessons Learned from the D-Tect Project.

By utilizing historical changes in Danish legislation related to mandatory vitamin D fortification of margarine, which was implemented in the mid 1930s and abruptly abandoned in June 1985, the studies in the D-tect project investigated the effects of vitamin D on health outcomes in individuals, who during gestation were exposed or unexposed to extra vitamin D from fortified margarine. This paper reviews and narratively summarizes the analytic approaches alongside the results of the societal fortification experiment studies from the D-tect project and addresses the challenges in designing societal experiment studies and evaluating their results. The latter are discussed as lessons learned that may be useful for designers of similar studies, expected to be extensively utilized while researching the health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic by comparing individuals born before and after the epidemic. In the D-tect project, 16 articles based on the societal fortification experiment were published analyzing 10 different outcomes and using different statistical approaches. Lessons learned included the detail of the analysis of the historical information on the exposure, availability and validity of the outcome data, variety of analytical approaches, and specifics concerning vitamin D effect evaluation, such as consideration of the influence of sunshine or season. In conclusion, the D-tect project clearly demonstrated the cost-effectiveness and research potential of natural- or societal-experiment-based studies.