Moral foundations and HPV vaccine acceptance in the United States: State, parental, and individual factors.

RATIONALE: Appeals to intuitive morality may present a novel approach to addressing vaccine hesitancy. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the relationship between morality and vaccination by employing Moral Foundations Theory to studies surrounding the HPV vaccination at multiple different levels of decision making. METHOD: We employed three different study modalities which examined moralities link to vaccination by employing Moral Foundations Theory. A state-wide ecological study aimed to understand population level trends. Two randomized control interventional studies were then created to understand the effects of Moral Foundations Theory based interventions on both parents of children and individual decision makers. RESULTS: We demonstrated a negative association at the state level between the purity moral foundations and HPV vaccination rates (ß = -.75, SE 0.23; p < .01) and a positive association between loyalty and HPV vaccination rates (ß = 0.62 SE 0.24; p < .05). The parental study built upon this by demonstrating negative association between higher moral purity scores and attitudes towards the HPV vaccine and intention to vaccinate their children (ß = -0.27 SE 0.07; p < .001). Our final study demonstrated a Moral Foundations Theory based intervention was associated with an increase in the odds of indicating an intention to receive the HPV vaccination (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 2.59, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.62-4.14). This equates to a 20% increase in the predicted probability of the intention to receive an HPV vaccine (39% CI (36%-42%) vs 60% CI (57%-63%). CONCLUSIONS: Together, these studies demonstrate that moral foundations, specifically the purity foundation, appear to have a strong and consistent relationship with HPV vaccination. They also demonstrate the how moral values-based interventions may serve as a novel approach to increase HPV vaccine uptake with potential to be employed to target vaccine hesitancy more broadly.

Persuasive COVID-19 vaccination campaigns on Facebook and nationwide vaccination coverage in Ukraine, India, and Pakistan.

Social media platforms have a wide and influential reach, and as such provide an opportunity to increase vaccine uptake. To date, there is no large-scale, robust evidence on the offline effects of online messaging campaigns. We aimed to test whether pre-tested, persuasive messaging campaigns from UNICEF, disseminated on Facebook, influenced COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Ukraine, India, and Pakistan. In Ukraine, we deployed a stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial (RCT). Half of the 24 oblasts (provinces) received five weeks of the intervention, the other half ten weeks of the intervention. In India, an RCT with an augmented synthetic control was conducted in five states (Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan), whereby 40 out of 174 districts were randomized to receive six weeks of intervention. In Pakistan we deployed a pre-post design, whereby 25 city districts received six weeks of the intervention. Weekly COVID-19 vaccination data was sourced through government databases. Using Poisson regression models, the association between the intervention and vaccine uptake was estimated. In Ukraine we conducted a survey among Facebook users at three time points during the RCT, to ascertain vaccination intentions and trust in vaccines. The campaigns reached more than 110 million Facebook users and garnered 2.9 million clicks. In Ukraine, we found that the intervention did not affect oblast-level vaccination coverage (Relative Risk (RR): 0.93, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.86-1.01). Similarly, in India and Pakistan we found no effect of our intervention (India: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70-1.04; Pakistan: RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.01-29.9). The survey among Facebook users in Ukraine showed that trust in vaccines and information sources was an important predictor of vaccination status and intention to get vaccinated. Our campaigns on Facebook had a wide reach, which did not translate in shifting behaviours. Timing and external events may have limited the effectiveness of our interventions.

Drivers of COVID-19 policy stringency in 175 countries and territories: COVID-19 cases and deaths, gross domestic products per capita, and health expenditures.

Background: New data on COVID-19 may influence the stringency of containment policies, but these potential effect are not understood. We aimed to understand the associations of new COVID-19 cases and deaths with policy stringency globally and regionally. Methods: We modelled the marginal effects of new COVID-19 cases and deaths on policy stringency (scored 0-100) in 175 countries and territories, adjusting for gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and health expenditure (% of GDP), and public expenditure on health. The time periods examined were March to August 2020, September 2020 to February 2021, and March to August 2021. Results: Policy response to new cases and deaths was faster and more stringent early in the COVID-19 pandemic (March to August 2020) compared to subsequent periods. New deaths were more strongly associated with stringent policies than new cases. In an average week, one new death per 100 000 people was associated with a stringency increase of 2.1 units in the March to August 2020 period, 1.3 units in the September 2020 to February 2021 period, and 0.7 units in the March to August 2021 period. New deaths in Africa and the Western Pacific were associated with more stringency than in other regions. Higher health expenditure as a percentage of GDP was associated with less stringent policies. Similarly, higher public expenditure on health by governments was mostly associated with less stringency across all three periods. GDP per capita did not have consistent patterns of associations with stringency. Conclusions: The stringency of COVID-19 policies was more strongly associated with new deaths than new cases. Our findings demonstrate the need for enhanced mortality surveillance to ensure policy alignment during health emergencies. Countries that invest less in health or have a lower public expenditure on health may be inclined to enact more stringent policies. This new empirical understanding of COVID-19 policy drivers can help public health officials anticipate and shape policy responses in future health emergencies.

Attitudes towards Monkeypox vaccination and predictors of vaccination intentions among the US general public.

Amidst an unprecedented Monkeypox outbreak, we aimed to measure knowledge, attitudes, practices and Monkeypox vaccination intentions among the U.S. adult population. We conducted an online cross-sectional survey, representative of the U.S. adult general public in June 2022. We asked participants whether they would receive a Monkeypox vaccine, if they were recommended to do so. Participants also answered questions on their self-assessed level of Monkeypox knowledge, risk perception, perceived exaggeration of the threat, and self-efficacy around Monkeypox. Furthermore, we asked about their trusted sources of information, COVID-19 vaccination status and administered the 6-item Vaccine Trust Indicator (VTI). Survey weights were created based on age, gender and race. We analyzed predictors of Monkeypox vaccination intentions using logistic regression, adjusted for education, age, race and ethnicity. A total of 856 respondents completed the survey, of which 51% (n = 436) were female and 41% (n = 348) had a college degree or higher. If recommended, 46% of respondents intended to get vaccinated against Monkeypox, 29% would not get vaccinated and 25% did not know. Almost half the respondents (47%) found their own knowledge level about Monkeypox poor or very poor. The most trusted sources of information about the outbreak were healthcare professionals and officials, but also known doctors and researchers with a large online following. Only 24% indicated that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention should be in charge of the outbreak response. Being vaccinated against COVID-19 was a strong predictor of intention to receive a Monkeypox if recommended (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 29.2, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 13.1-65.3). Increased risk perception was positively associated with vaccination intentions (aOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.8-3.6), scoring high on the VTI as well (5.4, 95% CI (3.2-9.1). The low levels of self-assessed knowledge, vaccination intentions and influence of COVID-19 vaccination status point to a lack of clear communication.

Assessment of the COVID-19 vaccine market landscape in 2021 relative to challenges in low- and middle-income countries.

To evaluate the early vaccine landscape relative to challenges faced by low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), we conducted a cross-sectional study of all COVID-19 vaccines in clinical trials in 2021 (n = 123) using a structured 13-point analytic framework. Supply sustainability was defined as a composite metric of four manufacturing and regulation variables. Vaccine desirability was defined as a composite metric of nine development and distribution variables. Ten vaccines in phases 2/3, 3, or 4 and five vaccines in phases 1 and 1/2 had a sustainability score equal to or above 0.5. Ten vaccines in phases 2/3, 3, or 4 and seven vaccines in phases 1 and 1/2 had a desirability score equal to or above 0.5. No vaccines in Phases 2/3, 3, or 4 met more than one distribution criterion. Structured assessment COVID-19 vaccine candidates in clinical trials in 2021 revealed numerous challenges to adequate access in LMICs. Key policy recommendations included increasing technology transfer to LMICs, developing international legal mechanisms to prevent export bans, and increasing investment in vaccine candidates with more favorable distribution profiles.

Media use and trust during the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from eight cross-sectional surveys in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: While a lot has been written about Sweden's COVID-19 control strategy, less is known about Swedish residents' media use during the pandemic and trust in and perceived agreement among key stakeholders commenting in the media. METHODS: Eight online, nationwide surveys were fielded between March and August 2020, during the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic in Sweden, with 8146 responses. Questions were asked on media usage, perceived tone of media, trust in key pandemic stakeholder groups commenting in the media (politicians, journalists, government officials, doctors/healthcare professionals and researchers) and perceived agreement among these key stakeholders about how the pandemic was handled in Sweden. RESULTS: Using five or more information sources was associated with increased perceived alarmism in the media. Women and those with tertiary education were more likely to trust key pandemic actors. Trust in doctors/healthcare professionals and researchers remained high over the course of the study, trust in politicians and journalists was relatively low throughout the study period, with a slight increase in April 2020. Trust in key stakeholders was strongly associated with perceived agreement among the key stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that trust in stakeholders was strongly associated with perceived consistency of messages from those stakeholders. The inverse also holds: perceived conflicting messages among stakeholders was associated with low trust in them. Taken together, this could point to the importance of building trust before a crisis. Trust-building efforts could be targeted to men and those with lower educational attainment, as they had lower trust in key stakeholders.

Debunking highly prevalent health misinformation using audio dramas delivered by WhatsApp: evidence from a randomised controlled trial in Sierra Leone.

INTRODUCTION: Infectious disease misinformation is widespread and poses challenges to disease control. There is limited evidence on how to effectively counter health misinformation in a community setting, particularly in low-income regions, and unsettled scientific debate about whether misinformation should be directly discussed and debunked, or implicitly countered by providing scientifically correct information. METHODS: The Contagious Misinformation Trial developed and tested interventions designed to counter highly prevalent infectious disease misinformation in Sierra Leone, namely the beliefs that (1) mosquitoes cause typhoid and (2) typhoid co-occurs with malaria. The information intervention for group A (n=246) explicitly discussed misinformation and explained why it was incorrect and then provided the scientifically correct information. The intervention for group B (n=245) only focused on providing correct information, without directly discussing related misinformation. Both interventions were delivered via audio dramas on WhatsApp that incorporated local cultural understandings of typhoid. Participants were randomised 1:1:1 to the intervention groups or the control group (n=245), who received two episodes about breast feeding. RESULTS: At baseline 51% believed that typhoid is caused by mosquitoes and 59% believed that typhoid and malaria always co-occur. The endline survey was completed by 91% of participants. Results from the intention-to-treat, per-protocol and as-treated analyses show that both interventions substantially reduced belief in misinformation compared with the control group. Estimates from these analyses, as well as an exploratory dose-response analysis, suggest that direct debunking may be more effective at countering misinformation. Both interventions improved people's knowledge and self-reported behaviour around typhoid risk reduction, and yielded self-reported increases in an important preventive method, drinking treated water. CONCLUSION: These results from a field experiment in a community setting show that highly prevalent health misinformation can be countered, and that direct, detailed debunking may be most effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04112680.

Engaging religious leaders to promote safe burial practices during the 2014-2016 Ebola virus disease outbreak, Sierra Leone.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the potential impact of engaging religious leaders in promoting safe burial practices during the 2014-2016 Ebola virus disease outbreak in Sierra Leone. METHODS: We analysed population-based household survey data from 3540 respondents collected around the peak of the outbreak in Sierra Leone, December 2014. Respondents were asked if in the past month they had heard an imam or pastor say that people should not touch or wash a dead body. We used multilevel logistic regression modelling to examine if exposure to religious leaders' messages was associated with protective burial intentions if a family member died at home and other Ebola protective behaviours. FINDINGS: Of the respondents, 3148 (89%) had been exposed to faith-based messages from religious leaders on safe Ebola burials and 369 (10%) were unexposed. Exposure to religious leaders' messages was associated with a nearly twofold increase in the intention to accept safe alternatives to traditional burials and the intention to wait ≥ 2 days for burial teams (adjusted odds ratio, aOR: 1.69; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.23-2.31 and aOR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.38-2.44, respectively). Exposure to messages from religious leaders was also associated with avoidance of traditional burials and of contact with suspected Ebola patients (aOR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.14-1.89 and aOR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.27-2.13, respectively). CONCLUSION: Public health messages promoted by religious leaders may have influenced safe burial behaviours during the Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone. Engagement of religious leaders in risk communication should be prioritized during health emergencies in similar settings.

Behaviour adoption approaches during public health emergencies: implications for the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Human behaviour will continue to play an important role as the world grapples with public health threats. In this paper, we draw from the emerging evidence on behaviour adoption during diverse public health emergencies to develop a framework that contextualises behaviour adoption vis-à-vis a combination of top-down, intermediary and bottom-up approaches. Using the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study, we operationalise the contextual framework to demonstrate how these three approaches differ in terms of their implementation, underlying drivers of action, enforcement, reach and uptake. We illustrate how blended strategies that include all three approaches can help accelerate and sustain protective behaviours that will remain important even when safe and effective vaccines become more widely available. As the world grapples with the COVID-19 pandemic and prepares to respond to (re)emerging public health threats, our contextual framework can inform the design, implementation, tracking and evaluation of comprehensive public health and social measures during health emergencies.

Risk perception during the 2014-2015 Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone.

BACKGROUND: Perceived susceptibility to a disease threat (risk perception) can influence protective behaviour. This study aims to determine how exposure to information sources, knowledge and behaviours potentially influenced risk perceptions during the 2014-2015 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak in Sierra Leone. METHODS: The study is based on three cross-sectional, national surveys (August 2014, n = 1413; October 2014, n = 2086; December 2014, n = 3540) that measured Ebola-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices in Sierra Leone. Data were pooled and composite variables were created for knowledge, misconceptions and three Ebola-specific behaviours. Risk perception was measured using a Likert-item and dichotomised into 'no risk perception' and 'some risk perception'. Exposure to five information sources was dichotomised into a binary variable for exposed and unexposed. Multilevel logistic regression models were fitted to examine various associations. RESULTS: Exposure to new media (e.g. internet) and community-level information sources (e.g. religious leaders) were positively associated with expressing risk perception. Ebola-specific knowledge and hand washing were positively associated with expressing risk perception (Adjusted OR [AOR] 1.4, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.2-1.8 and AOR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.7 respectively), whereas misconceptions and avoiding burials were negatively associated with risk perception, (AOR 0.7, 95% CI 0.6-0.8 and AOR 0.8, 95% CI 06-1.0, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our results illustrate the complexity of how individuals perceived their Ebola acquisition risk based on the way they received information, what they knew about Ebola, and actions they took to protect themselves. Community-level information sources may help to align the public's perceived risk with their actual epidemiological risk. As part of global health security efforts, increased investments are needed for community-level engagements that allow for two-way communication during health emergencies.

Community knowledge, perceptions and practices around COVID-19 in Sierra Leone: a nationwide, cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the public's knowledge, attitudes and practices about the novel coronavirus in Sierra Leone to inform an evidence-based communication strategy around COVID-19. DESIGN: Nationwide, cross-sectional Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices survey. SETTING: 56 randomly selected communities in all 14 districts in Sierra Leone. PARTICIPANTS: 1253 adults aged 18 years and older of which 52% were men. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We calculated proportions of core indicators (awareness, knowledge, risk perception, practices). A composite variable for knowledge (based on seven variables) was created, and categorised into low (0-2 correct), medium (3-4) and high (5-7). Predictors of knowledge were analysed with multilevel ordinal regression models. Associations between information sources, knowledge and two practices (washing hands with soap and avoiding crowds) were analysed using multilevel logistic regression models. RESULTS: We found that 75% of the respondents felt at moderate or great risk of contracting coronavirus. A majority (70%) of women did not know you can survive COVID-19, compared with 61% of men. 60% of men and 54% of women had already taken action to avoid infection with the coronavirus, mostly washing hands with soap and water (87%). Radio (73%) was the most used source for COVID-19 information, followed by social media (39%). Having a medium or high level of knowledge was associated with higher odds of washing hands with soap (medium knowledge: adjusted OR (AOR) 2.1, 95% CI 1.0 to 4.4; high knowledge: AOR 4.6, 95% CI 2.1 to 10.2) and avoiding crowds (medium knowledge: AOR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.6; high knowledge: AOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.3). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that in the context of COVID-19 in Sierra Leone, there is a strong association between knowledge and practices. Because the knowledge gap differs between genders, regions, educational levels and age, it is important that messages are specifically targeted to these core audiences.

Homecare for sick family members while waiting for medical help during the 2014-2015 Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone: a mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Caring for an Ebola patient is a known risk factor for disease transmission. In Sierra Leone during the outbreak in 2014/2015, isolation of patients in specialised facilities was not always immediately available and caring for a relative at home was sometimes the only alternative. This study sought to assess population-level protective caregiving intentions, to understand how families cared for their sick and to explore perceived barriers and facilitators influencing caregiving behaviours. METHODS: Data from a nationwide household survey conducted in December 2014 were used to assess intended protective behaviours if caring for a family member with suspected Ebola. Their association with socio-demographic variables, Ebola-specific knowledge and risk perception was analysed using multilevel logistic regression. To put the results into context, semi-structured interviews with caregivers were conducted in Freetown. RESULTS: Ebola-specific knowledge was positively associated with the intention to avoid touching a sick person and their bodily fluids (adjusted OR (AOR) 1.29; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.54) and the intention to take multiple protective measures (AOR 1.38; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.63). Compared with residing in the mostly urban Western Area, respondents from the initial epicentre of the outbreak (Eastern Province) had increased odds to avoid touching a sick person or their body fluids (AOR 4.74; 95% CI 2.55 to 8.81) and to take more than one protective measure (AOR 2.94; 95% CI 1.37 to 6.34). However, interviews revealed that caregivers, who were mostly aware of the risk of transmission and general protective measures, felt constrained by different contextual factors. Withholding care was not seen as an option and there was a perceived lack of practical advice. CONCLUSIONS: Ebola outbreak responses need to take the sociocultural reality of caregiving and the availability of resources into account, offering adapted and acceptable practical advice. The necessity to care for a loved one when no alternatives exist should not be underestimated.

Reporting in a health emergency: The roles of Sierra Leonean journalists during the 2014-2015 Ebola outbreak.

INTRODUCTION: In public health emergencies, local media are important sources of information for the public. Not much is known about the professional and personal roles and experiences of Sierra Leonean journalists during the Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak between 2014-2015. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: This qualitative study is based on semi-structured interviews with 13 Sierra Leonean journalists based in urban Freetown and rural Waterloo in February and March 2016. The majority of the journalists worked for radio stations. The mostly male journalists represented national, regional and local radio stations. Transcripts of the interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. The analysis was inspired by previously reported journalist roles and agenda-setting theory, which state that the media filter what is happening, making a few core issues more salient. Sierra Leonean journalists shifted from being sceptical monitors in the beginning of the outbreak, to collaborative instructors towards the end. While they adapted to different roles, journalists struggled with their own fears for the virus, which hampered their work. They indicated that the training they received about Ebola helped them overcome their fear. Being trained gave a sense of security that helped them carry out their jobs. By turning into instructors, journalists stepped away from their journalistic professional detachment-potentially exacerbated by their personal experiences. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The first months of the outbreak were marked by passive agenda-setting roles of Sierra Leonean journalists. It took several months before the outbreak became a core issue in local media. In health emergencies, efforts should be made to partner with local media to use their platforms for local, trusted journalists and leaders to disseminate public health messages. Whereas this might hamper journalists' credibility and can be challenging in areas with problematic press freedom, Sierra Leonean journalists experienced the outbreak as a driver of necessary change in their profession.

The association between quality measures of medical university press releases and their corresponding news stories-Important information missing.

BACKGROUND: The news media is a key source for health and medical information, and relies to a large degree on material from press releases (PR). Medical universities are key players in the dissemination of PRs. This study aims to 1) explore the relation between the quality of press releases (PRs) from medical universities and their corresponding news stories (NSs) and 2) to identify the likelihood that specific scientific and interest-raising measures appear or are omitted in PRs and NSs. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this retrospective study using quantitative content analysis, PRs (n = 507) from 21 medical universities in Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, the USA and the UK were retrieved. Of all PRs, 33% had media coverage, resulting in 496 NSs. With two codebooks, 18 scientific (e.g. reporting the study design of the study correctly) and 7 interest-raising measures (e.g. words like 'ground-breaking') were evaluated in the PRs and NSs. For all measures the percentage of presence in NSs and PRs was calculated, together with a Mean PR Influence Factor. Quality of PRs and NSs was defined as a score, based on 12 of the 18 scientific measures. Mean (SD) NS quality score was 6.5 (1.7) which was significantly lower than the PR score of 8.0 (1.5). The two quality scores were significantly correlated. Quality measures that were frequently omitted included reporting important study limitations (present in 21% of PRs, 21% of NSs), funding (59% of PRs, 7% of NSs) and conflicts of interest (16% of PRs, 3% of NSs). We did not evaluate the quality of the scientific papers (SPs), and can therefore not determine if the quality of PRs and NSs is associated with the quality of SPs. CONCLUSIONS: This large study of medical university press releases and corresponding news stories showed that important measures of a scientific study such as funding and study limitations were omitted to a very large extent. The lay public and health personnel as well as policy makers, politicians and other decision makers may be misled by incomplete and partly inaccurate representations of scientific studies which could negatively affect important health-related behaviours and decisions.

Risk Communication and Ebola-Specific Knowledge and Behavior during 2014-2015 Outbreak, Sierra Leone.

We assessed the effect of information sources on Ebola-specific knowledge and behavior during the 2014-2015 Ebola virus disease outbreak in Sierra Leone. We pooled data from 4 population-based knowledge, attitude, and practice surveys (August, October, and December 2014 and July 2015), with a total of 10,604 respondents. We created composite variables for exposures (information sources: electronic, print, new media, government, community) and outcomes (knowledge and misconceptions, protective and risk behavior) and tested associations by using logistic regression within multilevel modeling. Exposure to information sources was associated with higher knowledge and protective behaviors. However, apart from print media, exposure to information sources was also linked to misconceptions and risk behavior, but with weaker associations observed. Knowledge and protective behavior were associated with the outbreak level, most strongly after the peak, whereas risk behavior was seen at all levels of the outbreak. In future outbreaks, close attention should be paid to dissemination of information.