COVID-19 vaccination in low and middle-income countries: Creating a sustainable roadmap for promoting public health intervention.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a global public health threat ravaging the health systems. In low and middle-income countries (LMICs), COVID-19 and several other challenges concurrently worsen the health outcome indicators. Interestingly, vaccines have been identified as the most reliable and cost-effective public health intervention, and the governments in LMICs have instituted an array of plans to ensure every eligible person gets vaccinated. However, there is still considerable apathy around the use of the available COVID-19 vaccines in LMICs which is impeding the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, we explore the multiple interrelated factors behind low COVID-19 vaccination coverage in LMICs. It is therefore recommended that the governments in LMICs embrace multicomponent and wide-ranging strategies. This should involve utilising community-based approaches such as community pharmacy-led vaccination to promote community access to COVID-19 vaccines and to revive trust in national health authorities by offering population-specific, target-driven, transparent, and timely communication to the community who they serve about the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine. Communication strategies should be tailored to reflect diverse political orientations as this can enhance vaccine acceptance. Additionally, local political parties and representative should be engaged in broad alliances to facilitate community mobilisation and support for vaccination campaigns. Also, relevant Nongovernmental Organisations and Community-based Organisations should institute programs at the grassroots that incorporate the gatekeepers to the community aimed at influencing population behaviour regarding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Besides, the public health department in the ministry of health in LMICs should create more awareness, through social and mass media, particularly in the rural, semi-urban, and slum communities about the pivotal role of vaccination. Thus, we opined that these strategies will help LMICs achieve the COVID-19 vaccination target and further reposition the healthcare systems, and promote other public health interventions now and in the future.

The Impact of COVID-19 Vaccine Controversy on Parents' Perceptions of Routine Vaccinations.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly influenced public perceptions and behaviors related to vaccination. Understanding parental attitudes, knowledge gaps, and vaccination practices post-pandemic is crucial for informing effective public health strategies. This study aimed to investigate parental attitudes, knowledge, and practices toward routine childhood vaccination in the post-COVID-19 era, emphasizing shifts in perspectives and implications for vaccination strategies. Methodology A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 498 parents to assess their attitudes, knowledge, and practices regarding vaccination. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and t-tests where applicable, with p-values <0.05 considered statistically significant. Results The study revealed diverse parental attitudes toward vaccination post-COVID-19. While a majority (72.9%) maintained positive attitudes toward vaccination schedules and benefits, concerns regarding vaccine safety and efficacy were noted. Knowledge gaps persisted, with 16.5% strongly agreeing that children's vaccinations are weak and have no impact on disease prevention. Despite high adherence to vaccination schedules (68.9%), motivations behind vaccine administration were questioned, as 48.2% strongly disagreed that vaccination was solely for regulatory purposes. Conclusions Post-COVID-19, parental attitudes toward vaccination have evolved, reflecting increased concerns about safety and efficacy. Addressing knowledge gaps, combating misinformation, and enhancing trust in vaccination programs are imperative. Tailored communication strategies, education campaigns, and policy interventions are essential to promote vaccination acceptance and safeguard public health resilience in the post-pandemic era.

Barriers and Concerns that Contribute to Vaccine Hesitancy in Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) Individuals in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Despite research demonstrating the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines, hesitancy is extremely common in minority communities. The purpose of this study was to identify key barriers and concerns that contribute to vaccine hesitancy in Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) individuals and provide recommendations to address these barriers and concerns. METHODS: The study was an online cross-sectional survey conducted among 1491 BIPOC and Caucasian adults, recruited using social media networks in August-September 2021. The questionnaire consisted of five sections that probed concerns and attitudes contributing to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: Respondents were mostly Caucasian males (75.7%) and the average age was 29.1 years. A higher proportion of BIPOC respondents received both doses (50.6%) than Caucasian respondents (36.4%). Out of the unvaccinated, a higher percentage of BIPOC respondents did not plan on getting vaccinated (17.1%) compared to Caucasian respondents (4.2%). BIPOC respondents preferred the Pfizer-BioNTech (34.1%) vaccine whereas Caucasian respondents preferred AstraZeneca (29.3%). The biggest concern BIPOC and Caucasian respondents had with COVID-19 vaccines were side effects (56.6% vs 54.4%, respectively). BIPOC respondents identified dependability as the next biggest concern after side effects. A higher percentage of BIPOC respondents were against getting vaccinated against COVID-19 (16% vs 1.2%) compared to Caucasian respondents. CONCLUSION: Among unvaccinated respondents, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was most evident in the BIPOC respondents compared to Caucasian respondents. Side effects, trustworthiness, and lack of information were identified as the three most common concerns surrounding vaccines in general. Increased accessibility to reliable and accurate vaccine information in various languages/dialects can raise awareness about COVID-19 vaccinations in BIPOC communities.

The fear factor: examining the impact of fear on vaccine hesitancy and anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs.

OBJECTIVES: While anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs can reduce vaccine intentions, longitudinal research shows that vaccine hesitancy can increase conspiracy beliefs. In three experiments (N = 949), we examined the effect of fear about a vaccine on vaccine hesitancy and anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs. METHOD AND MEASURES: In Studies 1a (N = 221) and 1b (N = 508), participants were exposed to high fear (vs low fear) about a (fictional) vaccine before reporting vaccine hesitancy and anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs. In Study 2, all participants were exposed to high fear before being asked to think about not getting vaccinated (vs vaccinated) against the (fictional) disease. Participants then reported their vaccine hesitancy, anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs, and closeness to others who distrust official narratives. RESULTS: In Studies 1a and 1b, exposure to high fear (vs low fear) increased vaccine hesitancy, which was positively correlated with anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs. The reverse model's effect was either smaller (Study 1a) or non-significant (Study 1b). In Study 2, fear and not wanting to vaccinate resulted in vaccine hesitancy, which then predicted anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and feeling closer to those distrusting official narratives. CONCLUSION: Therefore, fear creates a response not to get vaccinated. A conspiracy belief may then justify this response.

Attitudes and beliefs of nurses who choose to not vaccinate for COVID 19 in West Virginia: A qualitative study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe beliefs and attitudes that underpin vaccine confidence and hesitancy in nurses who chose not to vaccinate for COVID-19. The research question that guided this work was: What are the beliefs and attitudes of nurses who chose to not vaccinate for COVID-19? METHODS: This study followed a focus group methodology to collect qualitative data from focused discussions to gather insights into the beliefs and attitudes of participants. Two focus groups consisting of 3 to 5 participants were conducted virtually. RESULTS: Using open coding, six themes were generated. Based on descriptors provided by participants, two themes were focused on beliefs, and four were related to attitudes about the vaccine. Findings suggest that participants' beliefs and attitudes were strengthened during this time in the pandemic. This event further divided nurses included in this study from their peers who chose to vaccinate and their employers who mandated inoculation. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the perceptions of this sample has given insight into the thoughts and feelings of nurses who chose not to vaccinate against COVID-19. This is a perspective that is often absent from scientific literature. Knowledge gained from this study may assist in supporting strategies such as open communication, conflict resolution, and collaboration in an effort to mitigate the divide within the nursing workforce, which may ultimately contribute to nursing retention in clinical settings.

A Systematic Review of Factors Associated with COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake, Hesitancy, and Acceptability Among Adults with HIV: Implications for Integrating COVID-19 Immunization into HIV Care.

The COVID-19 virus, once a public health emergency, is now endemic. Immunization remains an important measure for mitigating high levels of disease, morbidity, and mortality related to COVID-19 infection. People with HIV (PWH), in particular, benefit from COVID-19 vaccination because of increased risk for severe COVID-19 infection. However, previous data suggest vaccine hesitancy among this population. Given this context and the evolving epidemiology of COVID-19, this review examines factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, acceptability, and uptake among adults with HIV. Through a systematic search of electronic databases, we identified 56 peer-reviewed articles published between the years 2020 and 2023 that matched the objectives of our review out of a total of 797 screened citations. Among our final sample of articles, nearly all global regions were represented, and 61% of studies recruited only PWH. We identified eight categories of factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination outcomes, including HIV-specific factors (e.g., CD4 count), vaccine attitudes (e.g., vaccine confidence), factors related to the COVID-19 virus (e.g., concern about infection), factors specific to the COVID-19 vaccine (e.g., accessibility), social norms and peer factors (e.g., subjective norms), mental health (e.g., anxiety/depression) and other psychological factors (e.g., substance use), demographic characteristics (e.g., age), and health factors (e.g., vaccination history). Reflecting on these factors, we discuss populations in need of vaccine promotion, modifiable targets for intervention, and integrating immunization into HIV care. Public health efforts to promote COVID-19 immunization among PWH must include educational/informational, peer, and structural interventions and must now consider uptake of COVID-19 booster doses.

When reality knocks on the door. The effect of conspiracy beliefs on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and the moderating role of experience with the virus.

RATIONALE: Prior research suggests that belief in conspiracy theories can reduce the willingness of individuals to get vaccinated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Examining factors that may moderate this negative effect is an important area of research. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to examine the relationship between vaccine uptake and two types of conspiracy beliefs (COVID-19 and vaccine-related) and the moderating role of direct and indirect experiences with the coronavirus. METHODS: We draw on nationally representative survey data collected in Hungary in January 2022 (N=1000, 47% male, 53% female; mean age 49.6 years). Structural equation models and multi-group analysis were performed. RESULTS: Conspiracy beliefs were strongly associated with vaccine uptake, however, both direct and indirect experiences with the virus moderated the effect of conspiracy beliefs. Individuals who experienced a serious infection or reported a close person being infected by the virus developed severe symptoms or even died were less likely to take conspiracy theories seriously when deciding about their own vaccination. In two out of the four tested moderation effects, a negative experience with the virus reduced the negative effect of conspiracy beliefs. DISCUSSION: Our findings demonstrate that personal or close real-life experience with severe COVID-19 infection can significantly mitigate the impact of conspiracy beliefs on vaccine hesitancy, highlighting the importance of real-life evidence in overcoming misinformation and increasing vaccine uptake. Nevertheless, it is important to mention that our results are preliminary, and future studies need to replicate the findings and test their robustness.

Weighing the risks and benefits: Parental perspectives on COVID-19 vaccines for 5- to 11-year-old children.

BACKGROUND: Parents are the primary decision makers for their children's vaccination, yet, we have limited knowledge on what influences their decision making related to COVID-19 vaccination. The study aimed to understand these different considerations that shape the decisions of parents of children aged 5-11 years old. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study that included online focus group discussions (FGDs) with parents of children aged 5-11 years old. Data was collected between July 26th, 2022, and February 15th, 2023. A total of eight FGDs were conducted, audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was conducted, and peer debriefing was used to ensure methodological rigor. RESULTS: Findings revealed that parents of vaccinated and unvaccinated children employed language of risk-benefit analysis to inform their decision-making. Parents of vaccinated children highlighted concerns about spreading COVID-19, family member's health, and long COVID-19. For parents of unvaccinated children, they perceived potential vaccine side effects as more harmful than the risks associated with COVID-19. Participants contended that there was a lack of transparency from the government and public health agencies, highlighting inconsistent messaging which had fractured their trust in COVID-19-related recommendations and mandates. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that improved transparency on how evidence is developed and why recommendations and mandates shift during the pandemic would foster trust in the government and public health agencies. Open communication with health providers on the potential risks and benefits would also improve caregivers confidence in the vaccine.

Reach, Acceptability, and Patient Preferences of a Mobile Health-Based Survey to Assess COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Patients Receiving Dialysis.

Rationale & Objective: The majority of patients with kidney failure receiving dialysis own mobile devices, but the use of mobile health (mHealth) technologies to conduct surveys in this population is limited. We assessed the reach and acceptability of a short message service (SMS) text message-based survey that assessed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among patients receiving dialysis. Study Design & Exposure: A cross-sectional SMS-based survey conducted in January 2021. Setting & Participants: Patients receiving in-center hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, or home hemodialysis in a nonprofit dialysis organization in New York City. Outcomes: (1) Reach of the SMS survey, (2) Acceptability using the 4-item Acceptability of Intervention Measure, and (3) Patient preferences for modes of survey administration. Analytical Approach: We used Fisher exact tests and multivariable logistic regression to assess sociodemographic and clinical predictors of SMS survey response. Qualitative methods were used to analyze open-ended responses capturing patient preferences. Results: Among 1,008 patients, 310 responded to the SMS survey (response rate 31%). In multivariable adjusted analyses, participants who were age 80 years and above (aOR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.96) were less likely to respond to the SMS survey compared with those aged 18 to 44 years. Non-Hispanic Black (aOR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39-0.86), Hispanic (aOR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.19-0.51), and Asian or Pacific Islander (aOR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.28-0.74) individuals were less likely to respond compared with non-Hispanic White participants. Participants residing in census tracts with higher Social Vulnerability Index, indicating greater neighborhood-level social vulnerability, were less likely to respond to the SMS survey (fifth vs first quintile aOR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.37-0.99). Over 80% of a sample of survey respondents and nonrespondents completely agreed or agreed with the Acceptability of Intervention Measure. Qualitative analysis identified 4 drivers of patient preferences for survey administration: (1) convenience (subtopics: efficiency, multitasking, comfort, and synchronicity); (2) privacy; (3) interpersonal interaction; and (4) accessibility (subtopics: vision, language, and fatigue). Limitations: Generalizability, length of survey. Conclusions: An SMS text message-based survey had moderate reach among patients receiving dialysis and was highly acceptable, but response rates were lower in older (age ≥ 80), non-White individuals and those with greater neighborhood-level social vulnerability. Future research should examine barriers and facilitators to mHealth among patients receiving dialysis to ensure equitable implementation of mHealth-based technologies.

We conducted a short message service (SMS) text message-based survey that assessed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among patients receiving dialysis in New York City. Overall response rate was 31%, and those with age ≥ 80, non-White individuals, and participants with greater neighborhood-level social vulnerability were less likely to respond to the survey. Over 80% of participants found SMS-based surveys to be highly acceptable. Qualitative analysis showed that participants cared about the convenience, privacy, interpersonal interaction, and accessibility of surveys. Our results suggest that SMS text message surveys are a promising strategy to collect patient-reported data among patients receiving dialysis.

Exploring the relationship between vaccine hesitancy and mothers' perspectives on COVID-19 vaccines for children ages 5-11 years during the omicron predominant period 2021-2022: a qualitative study.

Background: The United States Food and Drug Administration authorized COVID-19 vaccines for children ages 5-11 years in October 2021 during the Omicron predominant period. Parental vaccine hesitancy was prevalent during this time, resulting in low childhood COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Most studies exploring factors influencing parental vaccine hesitancy have focused on racial and ethnic minorities and lower socioeconomic populations; however, there is little knowledge of the drive drivers of vaccine hesitancy among White parents with higher education and socioeconomic statuses. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with a sample of 15 White mothers of children ages 5-11 years in Atlanta, GA, between October-December 2021. Thematic analysis was performed using NVivo 12. Results: Mothers were college-educated, homeowners, and fully vaccinated against COVID-19. Key findings included decreased pediatrician's recommendations for COVID-19 vaccines, reliance on information from specialized doctors and scientists, distrust in public health authorities, high risk-perception of COVID-19 vaccines, and low risk-perception of COVID-19 disease. Factors related to vaccine acceptance were altruism and practicality. Conclusion: This study adds to the sparse literature on reasons for vaccine hesitancy among White mothers of children ages 5-11 years with higher educational and socioeconomic status. Improving vaccine uptake among this group is critical for protecting the health of their children and other vulnerable populations. Tailored vaccine messaging and intervention are warranted to address their unique attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. An enhanced understanding of the factors influencing subpopulations of parents can help vaccine policymakers and healthcare providers improve efforts to reduce vaccine hesitancy, particularly for new vaccines.

Safety profile assessment of HPV4 and HPV9 vaccines through the passive surveillance system of the Veneto Region (Italy) between 2008 and 2022: A 15-year retrospective observational study.

In Veneto Region, HPV vaccine has been actively offered to 12 year-old females since 2008, and to 12 year-old males since 2015. The study aims to analyze the safety profile of HPV4v and HPV9v vaccines and perform a case-by-case review of conditions of interest. Spontaneous reports related to HPV uploaded to the database of the Regional Pharmacovigilance Center between 2008-2022 were included. HPV vaccine doses administered until April 2022 in the Veneto Region were considered to calculate the reporting rate (RR). Potential "safety concerns" examined as conditions of interest were included through Standardized MedDRA or preferred terms searching queries. The level of diagnostic certainty was evaluated as per the Brighton Collaboration case definition criteria. A total of 637 reports and 1316 Adverse Events Following Immunizations (AEFI) were retrieved: 469 for HPV4v (73.6 %) and 168 for HPV9v (26.4 %). Serious reports were 71 (11.1 %): 49 (10.4 %) for HPV4v and 22 (13.1 %) for HPV9v. The RR for serious events between 2008-2022 was 6.9/100,000 administered doses, with no differences by vaccine type. Females and adults showed higher overall RR compared to males and to children and adolescents (p < 0.001), this result was confirmed by stratifying analysis by vaccine type. One case of Guillain Barré syndrome, anaphylactic shock, thrombocytopenia, Henoch Schoenlein purpura and four generalized seizures were reviewed. Vaccinovigilance data from the Veneto Region reaffirm a good safety profile for HPV vaccination and found no vaccine-related unexpected events. Such a detailed analysis may assist healthcare providers to advocate properly for HPV vaccination.

Global Resurgence of Measles in the Vaccination Era and Influencing Factors.

OBJECTIVE: Recent years have seen increased cases of measles despite widespread vaccination. We examine potential drivers behind the resurgence of measles. METHODS: We analyze the trends in measles incidence and vaccine coverage from 2010 to 2019 across World Health Organization (WHO) member countries using country-level linear regression models. We compute Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (ρ) between measles incidence and socioeconomic and vaccination-related variables using published data from the WHO member countries to identify key factors influencing measles incidence. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2019, global measles cases fluctuated with a notable rise in 2019 (measles cases per million in 2019 was about 140% higher than in 2010), alongside a declining vaccination coverage in many countries (59 out of 194 countries). Among 10 socioeconomic factors examined, per-capita national gross income, population literacy, urban residences, and political stability were significantly associated with measles incidence (ρ < 0, and P-value <0.05 for all these variables). These factors likely reflect the quality of public health infrastructure (e.g., access to vaccines), particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). In addition, stratified analysis suggests vaccine hesitancy likely contributed to measles case increases in high- and upper-middle income countries (HIC & UMIC). CONCLUSION: The socioeconomic determinants of measles transmission are interconnected and region-specific. Availability of public health resources and political stability significantly influence measles burdens in LMIC, while vaccine hesitancy presents a unique challenge to measles elimination in HIC and UMIC.

Factors associated with the COVID-19 booster vaccine intentions of young adults in the United States.

Young adults experience high coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence yet have the lowest vaccination and booster rates among adults. Understanding the factors influencing their intentions regarding boosters is essential for crafting effective public health strategies. We examined the psychosocial factors (attitudes, norms, perceived behavioral control) associated with their intentions to receive a COVID-19 booster. This cross-sectional study included 292 young adults aged 18-25 residing in Philadelphia who completed an online survey from September 2021 and February 2022 (mean age 21.98, standard deviation 2.25; 51% racial/ethnic minorities). The survey included measures of attitudes, norms, and perceived behavioral control related to COVID-19 vaccination. We employed structural equation modeling analysis to examine the intention of young adults to receive the COVID-19 booster and their vaccine-related attitudes, norms, and perceived behavioral control. Covariates included race/ethnicity and gender. Subjective norms were significantly associated with the intention to receive a COVID-19 booster (standardized ß̂ = 0.685, p = .018). Attitudes and perceived behavioral control showed no significant association with intention. Subgroup analyses based on race/ethnicity revealed that attitudes (standardized ß̂ = 0.488, p = .004) and subjective norms (standardized ß̂ = 0.451, p = .050) were predictors among young adults from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds, while only subjective norms (standardized ß̂ = 1.104, p = .002) were significant for non-Hispanic White young adults. Public health efforts should prioritize engaging healthcare providers and peer groups in order to influence subjective norms and promote collective responsibility and acceptance for vaccination. Tailored interventions and diverse communication strategies targeting specific subgroups of young adults may be useful to ensure comprehensive and effective vaccination initiatives.

Childhood vaccination among Polish immigrants in Norway: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Confidence in childhood vaccination is high in Norway and the Norwegian Childhood Immunization Programme (NCIP) achieves high overall coverage rates. However, lower coverage has been observed for some immigrant groups, including Polish immigrants who represent the largest immigrant group in Norway. Anti-vaccine sentiments and increased refusal of mandatory childhood vaccination has been on the rise in Poland, but it is unknown whether such attitudes also apply to Polish immigrants in Norway, as they experience a different vaccination policy and perhaps also different attitudes to vaccines. This qualitative study aims to explore attitudes towards childhood vaccination in Norway among Polish immigrants. METHODS: We interviewed 15 Polish parents living in Norway in 2022. We recruited the participants by purposive sampling and analyzed the interviews by reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: views of childhood vaccination, vaccine hesitancy, and differences in childhood vaccination between Poland and Norway. Overall, the participants favored childhood vaccination and viewed most of the vaccines included in the NCIP as safe and reliable. Human papilloma virus, meningococcal and pneumococcal vaccines were declined by some of the parents. Comparisons of childhood vaccination in Poland and Norway was evident in many of the interviews, especially among parents whose children had received vaccines in both countries. The participants were well acquainted with the NCIP, favored voluntary childhood vaccination, and the majority expressed a high level of trust in Norwegian health authorities. CONCLUSIONS: Polish immigrants to Norway generally expressed positive views about childhood vaccination. Non-vaccination was related to lack of knowledge and/or unfamiliarity with certain vaccines and not with anti-vaccine sentiments or conspiracy theories. The study highlights how parents' knowledge, in combination with norms and trends from both birth country and country of residence, influence parents' decision making about vaccination.

The affecting factors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in parents of children with cancer: A cross-sectional Jordanian study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Children with cancer have higher mortality and morbidity rates than have been reported in general children patients infected by coronavirus infection 2019 (COVID-19). Thus, for children with cancer, COVID-19 vaccination is a priority. This study aims to investigate the factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in parents of children with cancer in Jordan. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted during the third quarter of 2022 at the King Hussein Cancer Center in Amman, Jordan. The study employed a self-administered questionnaire, incorporating COVID-specific questions. Participants included parents of children aged 18 years or younger undergoing treatment or monitoring at the center. A straightforward random sampling approach was used to recruit participants. Ethical approval and institutional permission were obtained, ensuring voluntary participation with the right to withdraw. RESULTS: A total of 409 participants, predominantly female, were enrolled in the study. Notably, most of the enrolled parents did not intend to have their children vaccinated either for seasonal flu or for COVID-19, 76.2% and 78.7%, respectively. The bulk of the parents were encouraged to vaccinate their child by the child's pediatrician (82.9%). Parents' age and their children's age were significantly influenced their willingness to vaccinate their children with the COVID-19 vaccine (p < .001), in which parents' age group 45-54 years and children's age group above 15 years old show the highest vaccination rate. Meanwhile, there was a significant association between children's vaccination with parents suffering from chronic disease (p < .001) and parents receiving the COVID-19 vaccine (p = .014). There are still some concerns regarding the COVID-19 vaccine's effectiveness, safety, and whether it is essential for their child. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of parents in Jordan are hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine when considering its administration to their children with cancer. This finding emphasizes the importance of communication and education to address vaccination hesitancy.

Use of narratives to enhance childhood vaccine acceptance: Results of an online experiment among Canadian parents.

Identifying effective interventions to promote children's vaccination acceptance is crucial for the health and wellbeing of communities. Many interventions can be implemented to increase parental awareness of the benefits of vaccination and positively influence their confidence in vaccines and vaccination services. One potential approach is using narratives as an intervention. This study aims to evaluate the effects of a narrative-based intervention on parents' attitudes and vaccination intentions. In a pre-post experiment, 2,000 parents of young children recruited from an online pan-Canadian panel were randomly exposed to one of the three videos presenting narratives to promote childhood vaccination or a control condition video about the importance and benefits of physical activity in children. Pre-post measures reveal a relatively modest but positive impact of the narratives on parents' attitudes and intention to vaccinate their child(ren). The results also suggest that narratives with more emotional content may be more effective in positively influencing vaccine attitudes than the more factual narrative. Using narratives to promote vaccination can positively influence parents' views and intentions toward childhood vaccines, but research is still required to identify the best components of such interventions.

Psychosocial dimensions of vaccine hesitancy: A systematic review.

Despite widely recognised effectiveness against the spread of COVID-19, vaccine hesitancy persists. This systematic literature review aimed to clarify the definition and the operationalisation of the term 'vaccine hesitancy' and disclose the various psychosocial factors underlying this phenomenon. The results of studies conducted in European countries and in the United States after the vaccines became available were taken into account. The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. efinitions and measures of vaccine hesitancy differed across the studies, limiting their comparison. Nonetheless, by drawing on theoretical frameworks, we were able to identify several psychosocial variables in determining vaccine hesitancy. Our findings point to the need for a transdisciplinary approach to understanding the antecedents of vaccine hesitancy. A better understanding of the phenomenon may help to develop interventions and social policies to address a complex challenge such as vaccination hesitancy.

Challenges and Implications for Substance Use and Mental Healthcare Among Under-Resourced Women in the COVID-19 Era.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated disparities in mental healthcare and substance use disorder (SUD) treatment access, especially in under-resourced communities. This study aimed to comprehend the experiences of under-resourced women with SUD during the pandemic, their knowledge and attitudes toward it, and its impact on substance use and treatment access. METHODS: A cross-sectional study included 66 under-resourced women receiving medically managed withdrawal treatment at a community residential SUD center. Data collection occurred between November 2021 and August 2022, utilizing a 75-item instrument covering COVID-19 exposure and its impact on health, substance use, treatment access, vaccination status, beliefs, and knowledge. Descriptive analyses summarized the data. RESULTS: Participants faced various challenges during the pandemic. Many reported increased substance use, especially alcohol, opioids, benzodiazepines, and nicotine. Mental health stability was negatively affected, exacerbating existing disorders and limiting mental healthcare access. A majority (56.1%) reported that their chronic mental health disorder was less stable during the pandemic. Twenty (30.3%) participants reported that they had been diagnosed with a new mental health disorder since the pandemic, and 28.8% reported that it was harder for them to access mental healthcare during the pandemic. Job loss, housing instability, and financial strain were prevalent. Half (n=33, 50%) received a COVID-19 vaccine dose, while 27.3% (n=18) declined vaccination due to knowledge gaps and religious beliefs. The majority (n=41, 62.1%) worried about securing basic needs such as groceries and medication, with 64.6% (n=42) expressing a desire to cope using alcohol or drugs. CONCLUSIONS: This study expands upon previous research by examining the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in the context of substance use disorder treatment. Unlike previous data, which focused solely on substance use behaviors, our study delves into the impact of the pandemic on co-occurring mental health disorders. Findings underscore the need for gender-responsive and culturally appropriate SUD treatment. Vaccine hesitancy, as reflected in the study, necessitates more effective, tailored evidence-based informational campaigns. Efforts must focus on enhancing mental healthcare access, reducing stigma, and supporting individuals with co-occurring conditions amidst this evolving COVID-19 health crisis.

Parental hesitancy about COVID-19, influenza, HPV, and other childhood vaccines.

BACKGROUND: Some public health professionals have expressed concern that the COVID-19 pandemic has increased vaccine hesitancy about routine childhood vaccines; however, the differential prevalence of vaccine hesitancy about specific vaccines has not been measured. METHODS: Data from the National Immunization Survey-Child COVID-19 Module (NIS-CCM) were analyzed to assess the proportion of children ages 6 months-17 years who have a parent with hesitancy about: COVID-19, influenza, human papillomavirus (HPV) (for children ≥ 9 years) vaccines, and "all other childhood shots." Interviews from October 2022 through April 2023 were analyzed. RESULTS: The percentage of children with a vaccine-hesitant parent varied by vaccine. 55.9% of children had a parent hesitant about COVID-19 vaccine, 30.9% hesitant about influenza vaccine, 30.1% hesitant about HPV vaccine, and 12.2% had a parent hesitant about other vaccines such as measles, polio, and tetanus. CONCLUSION: The study findings suggest that differential interventions and communications to parents be used to educate about COVID-19, influenza, HPV, and routine childhood vaccinations because the hesitancy levels differ widely.

Racial (In)Equity in South Los Angeles-Community Centered Experiences with COVID-19 Syndemics.

Objectives: To analyze community experiences involving COVID-19 vaccination access and equity in Black and Latina/o/x communities within South Los Angeles, using a socioecological framework. Methods: We conducted four virtual focus groups (n = 33 total participants) in 2021, with Black and Latina/o/x community members, community leaders, and community-based providers in South Los Angeles, a region highly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. We used a grounded theory approach to guide the analysis and generate data shaped by participant perspectives. Results: Participants across groups consistently emphasized medical mistrust, fear/skepticism, misinformation, accessibility, and feelings of pressure and blame as factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination decisions. The need to address pandemic-related socioeconomic hardships in underresourced communities was equally highlighted. Conclusions: Findings show that building trust, providing tailored information, and continued investment into diversity and equity initiatives can support Black and Latino/a/x communities in making informed health decisions. Community-centered support services should address the economic, social, and structural impact of the pandemic on vulnerable communities. Furthermore, public health and policy efforts must prioritize funding to equip social and health care systems with infrastructure investment in racial and ethnic minority communities.