A scoping review of active, participant centred, digital adverse events following immunization (AEFI) surveillance of WHO approved COVID-19 vaccines: A Canadian immunization Research Network study.

This scoping review examines the role of digital solutions in active, participant-centered surveillance of adverse events following initial release of COVID-19 vaccines. The goals of this paper were to examine the existing literature surrounding digital solutions and technology used for active, participant centered, AEFI surveillance of novel COVID-19 vaccines approved by WHO. This paper also aimed to identify gaps in literature surrounding digital, active, participant centered AEFI surveillance systems and to identify and describe the core components of active, participant centered, digital surveillance systems being used for post-market AEFI surveillance of WHO approved COVID-19 vaccines, with a focus on the digital solutions and technology being used, the type of AEFI detected, and the populations under surveillance. The findings highlight the need for customized surveillance systems based on local contexts and the lessons learned to improve future vaccine monitoring and pandemic preparedness.

Education components of school vaccine mandates: An environmental scan.

BACKGROUND: School vaccine mandates (SVMs) are population health interventions that require monitoring and communicating about vaccination of school-aged children, with an aim of controlling infectious disease outbreaks. While 43 % of World Health Organization member states report having some sort of SVM, their details vary. A newer element of some SVMs is an "education component" requiring compulsory information, education, or counseling of parents/guardians who decline to vaccinate their children for non-medical reasons. METHODS: This environmental scan sought, mapped, and synthesized evidence on the existence, format, and impacts of education components of SVMs in 18 affluent Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development comparator countries. FINDINGS: We found current SVMs in nine of the 18 comparator countries, but education components to those SVMs only in Canada (n = 2) and the U.S. (n = 9), where such policies were made at the provincial/state level. The earliest was implemented in 2011 and most recent has not yet been implemented. Education components were used as requirements for obtaining non-medical exemptions from SVMs, and involved either an informational paper to be read and signed, a counseling or information session from a health professional (public health worker or licensed provider such as family doctor), or an online module to be completed. Peer-reviewed research on in-person sessions suggests association with at least short-term increased vaccine uptake and reduction of non-medical exemptions. Available data on online module education components suggests similar impacts, but research to date is limited. CONCLUSION: SVMs with educational components are uncommon but have been increasing since 2011. The details of these education components vary, although topics covered in online modules are relatively consistent. Evidence to date suggests at least short-term reduction in non-medical exemptions associated with implementation of SVM education components, but additional research is required to follow-up and confirm, especially as regards online education modules.

Proof-of-vaccination credentials for COVID-19 and considerations for future use of digital proof-of-immunization technologies: Results of an expert consultation.

Objective: As part of COVID-19 pandemic control efforts, digital proof-of-vaccination credentials were launched in Canada in 2021-2022 following widespread vaccine availability. Given the controversy over proof-of-vaccination credentials-often colloquially called vaccine or immunization "passports"-it is imperative to document successes, shortcomings, and recommendations for any future uses. Methods: This expert consultation applied inductive qualitative content analysis to online video interviews with key informants whose expertise ranged from ethics to public health to computer science to identify what we can learn from this experience with proof-of-vaccination credentials, and what decision-makers must keep in mind for possible future use of such technologies. Results: There remains a lack of consensus regarding appropriate language and scope for digital proof-of-vaccination technologies, the respective roles of the technology sector versus government in design and implementation, and parameters for future use. However, experts agree on many recommendations, including the importance of clear communication, evidence-based rationale for the use of proof-of-vaccination credentials, multidisciplinary consultation including academic experts and the public, and the importance of pan-Canadian standards for accessibility and interoperability. Identified risks of use that emerged, and should be minimized in the future, include risks of coercion and backlash; threats to access, equity and privacy; and impacts such as costs of the technology and workload burden of enforcement and fraud detection. Conclusions: There is much to learn from this first major use of digital proof-of-vaccination credentials. A full scientific review of the impacts on health and equity should be combined with expert recommendations to create pan-Canadian guidelines for the future use of digital proof-of-vaccination solutions.

Social media and online safety practices of young parents.

Studies of parents' online safety concerns typically centre on information privacy and on worries over unknown third parties preying on children, whereas investigations into youth perspectives on online safety have found young people to focus on threats to safety or reputation by known individuals. The case of youth who are themselves parents raises questions regarding how these differing perspectives are negotiated by individuals who are in dual roles as youth and parents. Using interview and ethnographic observation data from the longitudinal Young Parent Study in British Columbia, Canada, this analysis investigates social media and online safety practices of 113 young parents. Online safety concerns of young parents in this study focused on personal safety, their children's online privacy and image management. These concerns reflect their dual roles, integrating youth image and information management concerns with parental concerns over the safety and information privacy of their own children.

Pregnant and lactating people's strategies to mitigate the risk of cannabis consumption.

BACKGROUND: Multiple studies have demonstrated that pregnant and lactating people who use cannabis perceive a variety of benefits from that use, offering some explanation of why rates of use continue to increase. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore pregnant and lactating people's perceptions of the risks of cannabis use and understand what steps, if any, they take to mitigate these risks. DESIGN: Qualitative description. METHODS: We analyzed semi-structured interviews with 52 Canadians who made the decision to start, stop, or continue using cannabis during pregnancy or lactation between 2019 and 2021. Data collection iterated with analysis. We used a conventional (inductive) approach to content analysis. RESULTS: Perception of risk was found to be an essential component of decision-making about cannabis use. We identified a cycle of "risk identification," "management," and "observation" of effects. First, the pregnant or lactating person assesses the risks and weighs them against the perceived benefits of cannabis use. Second, they take action to minimize risks, with some choosing abstinence. Others, often those who were using cannabis to manage symptoms, continued cannabis use but devised a variety of other risk mitigation strategies such as, decreasing the amount or frequency of their use, changing the form of cannabis, and strategically timing their use with caregiving responsibilities. The final stage of the cycle involves seeking information about whether or not the initial perceived risk has manifested after implementing mitigation strategies, through observations and clinical information about the pregnancy or child. CONCLUSION: Participants consistently engaged in deliberation about the risks and benefits associated with their perinatal cannabis use. Nearly all implemented strategies intended to minimize risk. Our results highlight the need for more research to inform clear public health messaging about risk mitigation to minimize the potential harms of perinatal cannabis use. This work informs clinicians about patient-perceived risks and mitigation strategies which could in turn help inform shared decision-making conversations.

How do perceptions of Covid-19 risk impact pregnancy-related health decisions? A convergent parallel mixed-methods study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Pregnant people have a higher risk of severe COVID-19 disease. They have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 infection control policies, which exacerbated conditions resulting in intimate partner violence, healthcare access, and mental health distress. This project examines the impact of accumulated individual health decisions and describes how perinatal care and health outcomes changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVES: Quantitative strand: Describe differences between 2019, 2021, and 2022 birth groups related to maternal vaccination, perinatal care, and mental health care. Examine the differential impacts on racialized and low-income pregnant people.Qualitative strand: Understand how pregnant people's perceptions of COVID-19 risk influenced their decision-making about vaccination, perinatal care, social support, and mental health. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a Canadian convergent parallel mixed-methods study. The quantitative strand uses a retrospective cohort design to assess birth group differences in rates of Tdap and COVID-19 vaccination, gestational diabetes screening, length of post-partum hospital stay, and onset of depression, anxiety, and adjustment disorder, using administrative data from ICES, formerly the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Ontario) and PopulationData BC (PopData) (British Columbia). Differences by socioeconomic and ethnocultural status will also be examined. The qualitative strand employs qualitative description to interview people who gave birth between May 2020- December 2021 about their COVID-19 risk perception and health decision-making process. Data integration will occur during design and interpretation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study received ethical approval from McMaster University and the University of British Columbia. Findings will be disseminated via manuscripts, presentations, and patient-facing infographics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov registration number: NCT05663762.

Exploring parents' views of the use of narratives to promote childhood vaccination online.

BACKGROUND: Negative information about vaccines that spreads online may contribute to parents' vaccine hesitancy or refusal. Studies have shown that false claims about vaccines that use emotive personal narratives are more likely to be shared and engaged with on social media than factual evidence-based public health messages. The aim of this study was to explore parents' views regarding the use of positive narratives to promote childhood vaccination. METHODS: We identified three ∼4-minute video narratives from social media that counter frequent parental concerns about childhood vaccination: parents and informed decision-making (online misinformation about vaccines); a paediatrician's clinical experience with vaccine-preventable diseases (prevention of still existing diseases); and a mother's experience with vaccine-preventable disease (risks of the disease). Focus group discussions were held with parents of children aged 0 to 5 years to assess their views on these three narratives and their general opinion on the use of narratives as a vaccine promotion intervention. RESULTS: Four focus groups discussions were virtually held with 15 parents in December 2021. In general, parents trusted both health care provider's and parent's narratives, but participants identified more with stories having a parent as the main character. Both narratives featuring personal stories with vaccine-preventable diseases were preferred by parents, while the story about informed decision-making was perceived as less influential. Parents expressed the need for reliable and nuanced information about vaccines and diseases and felt that a short video format featuring a story was an efficient vaccine promotion intervention. However, many mentioned that they generally are not watching such videos while navigating the Web. CONCLUSION: While vaccine-critical stories are widely shared online, evidence on how best public health could counter these messages remains scarce. The use of narratives to promote vaccination was well-perceived by parents. Future studies are needed to assess reach and impact of such an intervention.

From high hopes to disenchantment: A qualitative analysis of editorial cartoons on COVID-19 vaccines in Canadian newspapers.

In Canada, the first COVID-19 vaccine was approved for use in December 2020, marking the beginning of a large vaccination campaign. The campaign was not only unprecedented in terms of reach, but also with regards to the amount of information about vaccines that circulated in traditional and social media. This study's aim was to describe COVID-19 vaccine related discourses in Canada through an analysis of editorial cartoons. We collected 2172 cartoons about COVID-19 published between January 2020 and August 2022 in Canadian newspapers. These cartoons were downloaded and a first thematic analysis was conducted using the WHO-EPIWIN taxonomy (cause, illness, treatment, interventions, and information). From this, 389 cartoons related to COVID-19 vaccines were identified under the treatment category. These were subjected to a second thematic analysis to assess main themes (e.g., vaccine development, campaign progress, etc.), characters featured (e.g., politicians, public figures, public) and position with respect to vaccine (favorable, unfavorable, neutral). Six main themes emerged: Research and development of vaccines; Management of the vaccination campaign; Perceptions of and experiences with vaccination services; Measures and incentives to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake; Criticism of the unvaccinated; and Effectiveness of vaccination. Our analysis revealed a shift in attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination from high hopes to disenchantment, which may reflect some vaccine fatigue. In the future, public health authorities could face some challenges in maintaining confidence and high COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

The influence of sociodemographic factors on COVID-19 vaccine certificate acceptance: A cross-sectional study.

Vaccine certificates have been implemented worldwide, aiming to promote vaccination rates and to reduce the spread of COVID-19. However, their use during the COVID-19 pandemic was controversial and has been criticized for infringing upon medical autonomy and individual rights. We administered a national online survey exploring social and demographic factors predicting the degree of public approval of vaccine certificates in Canada. We conducted a multivariate linear regression which revealed which factors were predictive of vaccine certificate acceptance in Canada. Self-reported minority status (p < .001), rurality (p < .001), political ideology (p < .001), age (p < .001), having children under 18 in the household (p < .001), education (p = .014), and income status (p = .034) were significant predictors of attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine certificates. We observed the lowest vaccine-certificate approval among participants who: self-identify as a visible minority; live in rural areas; are politically conservative; are 18-34 years of age; have children under age 18 living in the household; have completed an apprenticeship or trades education; and those with an annual income between $100,000-$159,999. The present findings are valuable for their ability to inform the implementation of vaccine certificates during future pandemic scenarios which may require targeted communication between public health agencies and under-vaccinated populations.

The Use of Web-Based Patient Reviews to Assess Medical Oncologists' Competency: Mixed Methods Sequential Explanatory Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients increasingly use web-based evaluation tools to assess their physicians, health care teams, and overall medical experience. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the extent to which the standardized physician competencies of the CanMEDS Framework are present in web-based patient reviews (WPRs) and to identify patients' perception of important physician qualities in the context of quality cancer care. METHODS: The WPRs of all university-affiliated medical oncologists in midsized cities with medical schools in the province of Ontario (Canada) were collected. Two reviewers (1 communication studies researcher and 1 health care professional) independently assessed the WPRs according to the CanMEDS Framework and identified common themes. Comment scores were then evaluated to identify κ agreement rates between the reviewers, and a descriptive quantitative analysis of the cohort was completed. Following the quantitative analysis, an inductive thematic analysis was performed. RESULTS: This study identified 49 actively practicing university-affiliated medical oncologists in midsized urban areas in Ontario. A total of 473 WPRs reviewing these 49 physicians were identified. Among the CanMEDS competencies, those defining the roles of medical experts, communicators, and professionals were the most prevalent (303/473, 64%; 182/473, 38%; and 129/473, 27%, respectively). Common themes in WPRs include medical skill and knowledge, interpersonal skills, and answering questions (from the patient to the physician). Detailed WPRs tend to include the following elements: experience and connection; discussion and evaluation of the physician's knowledge, professionalism, interpersonal skills, and punctuality; in positive reviews, the expression of feelings of gratitude and a recommendation; and in negative reviews, discouragement from seeking the physician's care. Patients' perception of medical skills is less specific than their perception of interpersonal qualities, although medical skills are the most commented-on element of care in WPRs. Patients' perception of interpersonal skills (listening, compassion, and overall caring demeanor) and other experiential phenomena, such as feeling rushed during appointments, is often specific and detailed. Details about a physician's interpersonal skills or "bedside manner" are highly perceived, valued, and shareable in an WPR context. A small number of WPRs reflected a distinction between the value of medical skills and that of interpersonal skills. The authors of these WPRs claimed that for them, a physician's medical skills and competence are more important than their interpersonal skills. CONCLUSIONS: CanMEDS roles and competencies that are explicitly patient facing (ie, those directly experienced by patients in their interactions with physicians and through the care that physicians provide) are the most likely to be present and reported on in WPRs. The findings demonstrate the opportunity to learn from WPRs, not simply to discern physicians' popularity but to grasp what patients may expect from their physicians. In this context, WPRs can represent a method for the measurement and assessment of patient-facing physician competency.

"I Want People to Be Able to Make an Informed Choice": How Quebec naturopaths discuss vaccination in their practice.

Health care providers' recommendations can play an important role in individuals' vaccination decisions. Despite being one of the most popular complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), naturopathy is understudied in relation to vaccination decisions. We sought to address this gap through this study of vaccination perspectives of naturopathy practitioners in the province of Quebec, Canada. We conducted in-depth interviews with 30 naturopaths. Thematic analysis was conducted. Main themes were developed deductively (i.e., based on prior literature) and expanded through inductive coding of the data. Participants noted that they discuss vaccination in their practice, but only when clients asked questions or wanted advice. Naturopaths described refraining from explicitly recommending for or against vaccination. Instead, they focus on empowering their clients to make their own informed decision regarding vaccination. Most participants noted that they direct clients towards sources of information so that clients could decide for themselves, but some mentioned they discussed with clients what they considered to be risks associated with vaccination, as well as its benefits. These discussions were framed through a personalized and individual approach with clients.

Making informed choices about cannabis use during pregnancy and lactation: A qualitative study of information use.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis use during pregnancy and lactation continues to increase as some perceive cannabis to be helpful for symptom management and coping. As such, pregnant and lactating people are faced with challenging decisions, weighing benefits against the potential risks of cannabis use. To help clinicians facilitate informed choices, we explored the self-identified information needs of pregnant and lactating people who are deciding whether or not to use cannabis. We aimed to describe the modes and sources of their information-seeking and their satisfaction with the information they found. METHODS: We interviewed 52 people in Canada who made the decision to start, stop, or continue using cannabis during pregnancy and lactation. Participants were recruited from advertisements in prenatal clinics and on social media. We utilized an inductive approach to analysis focused on information used in decision-making about cannabis use, including the process of seeking and evaluating that information. RESULTS: Participants were deliberate in their search for information, most commonly seeking information on risks of use. Information sources were mainly online material or people in their social networks. Clinicians were not commonly described as a knowledgeable or supportive source of information. Overwhelmingly, participants described the information they found as insufficient and emphasized the need for more comprehensive and trustworthy sources of information. CONCLUSIONS: Participants identified distinct and unmet information needs associated with their decision to use cannabis. They described a desire for clear evidence about the impact of cannabis use, including information about how to balance the benefits they perceived from cannabis use with the risks of harm.

"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.

Unmasking the Twitter Discourses on Masks During the COVID-19 Pandemic: User Cluster-Based BERT Topic Modeling Approach.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has spotlighted the politicization of public health issues. A public health monitoring tool must be equipped to reveal a public health measure's political context and guide better interventions. In its current form, infoveillance tends to neglect identity and interest-based users, hence being limited in exposing how public health discourse varies by different political groups. Adopting an algorithmic tool to classify users and their short social media texts might remedy that limitation. Objective: We aimed to implement a new computational framework to investigate discourses and temporal changes in topics unique to different user clusters. The framework was developed to contextualize how web-based public health discourse varies by identity and interest-based user clusters. We used masks and mask wearing during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in the English-speaking world as a case study to illustrate the application of the framework. Methods: We first clustered Twitter users based on their identities and interests as expressed through Twitter bio pages. Exploratory text network analysis reveals salient political, social, and professional identities of various user clusters. It then uses BERT Topic modeling to identify topics by the user clusters. It reveals how web-based discourse has shifted over time and varied by 4 user clusters: conservative, progressive, general public, and public health professionals. Results: This study demonstrated the importance of a priori user classification and longitudinal topical trends in understanding the political context of web-based public health discourse. The framework reveals that the political groups and the general public focused on the science of mask wearing and the partisan politics of mask policies. A populist discourse that pits citizens against elites and institutions was identified in some tweets. Politicians (such as Donald Trump) and geopolitical tensions with China were found to drive the discourse. It also shows limited participation of public health professionals compared with other users. Conclusions: We conclude by discussing the importance of a priori user classification in analyzing web-based discourse and illustrating the fit of BERT Topic modeling in identifying contextualized topics in short social media texts.

"We need to protect each other": COVID-19 vaccination intentions and concerns among Racialized minority and Indigenous Peoples in Canada.

People may choose to receive vaccines in response to pressures that outweigh any concerns that they have. We explored Racialized minority and Indigenous Peoples' motivations for, perceptions of choice in, and concerns about, COVID-19 vaccination. We used a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach, including a national survey administered around the time vaccines were first authorized (Dec 2020) followed by qualitative interviews when vaccines were becoming more readily available to adults (May-June 2021). We analyzed survey data using descriptive statistics and interviews using critical feminist methodologies. Survey respondents self-identified as a Racialized minority (n = 1488) or Indigenous (n = 342), of which 71.4% and 64.6%, respectively, intended to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Quantitative results indicated perceptions of COVID-19 disease were associated with vaccination intention. For instance, intention was associated with agreement that COVID-19 disease is severe, risk of becoming sick is great, COVID-19 vaccination is necessary, and vaccines available in Canada will be safe (p < 0.001). COVID-19 vaccines were in short supply in Canada when we subsequently completed qualitative interviews with a subset of Racialized minority (n = 17) and Indigenous (n = 10) survey respondents. We coded interview transcripts around three emergent themes relating to governmentality and cultural approaches to intersectional risk theories: feelings of collective responsibility, choice as privilege, and remaining uncertainties about COVID-19 vaccines. For example, some mentioned the responsibility and privilege to receive a vaccine earlier than those living outside of Canada. Some felt constraints on their freedom to choose to receive or refuse a vaccine from intersecting oppressions or their health status. Although all participants intended to get vaccinated, many mentioned uncertainties about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination. Survey respondents and interview participants demonstrated nuanced associations of vaccine acceptance and hesitancy shaped by perspectives of vaccine-related risks, symbolic associations of vaccines with hope, and intersecting social privileges and inequities (including racialization).

Understanding the Influence of Web-Based Information, Misinformation, Disinformation, and Reinformation on COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance: Protocol for a Multicomponent Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has generated an explosion in the amount of information shared on the internet, including false and misleading information on SARS-CoV-2 and recommended protective behaviors. Prior to the pandemic, web-based misinformation and disinformation were already identified as having an impact on people's decision to refuse or delay recommended vaccination for themselves or their children. OBJECTIVE: The overall aims of our study are to better understand the influence of web-based misinformation and disinformation on COVID-19 vaccine decisions and investigate potential solutions to reduce the impact of web-based misinformation and disinformation about vaccines. METHODS: Based on different research approaches, the study will involve (1) the use of artificial intelligence techniques, (2) a web-based survey, (3) interviews, and (4) a scoping review and an environmental scan of the literature. RESULTS: As of September 1, 2022, data collection has been completed for all objectives. The analysis is being conducted, and results should be disseminated in the upcoming months. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study will help with understanding the underlying determinants of vaccine hesitancy among Canadian individuals and identifying effective, tailored interventions to improve vaccine acceptance among them. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41012.

Suitable but requiring support: How the midwifery model of care offers opportunities to counsel the vaccine hesitant pregnant population.

Uptake of vaccination during pregnancy in Canada is lower than comparator countries. A recommendation from a trusted perinatal healthcare provider is a key opportunity to promote vaccine uptake and improve confidence. This study aims to identify barriers and opportunities to vaccination in midwifery care. Seventeen semi-structured telephone interviews with practicing midwives, educators and public health professionals with immunization training experiences were conducted. Documents pertaining to the midwifery profession (approx. 50) were reviewed. Inductive thematic analysis identified logistical, interprofessional, and information barriers preventing Canadian midwives from administering vaccines and counseling clients about vaccination, as well as opportunities to address each barrier. Key interventions at the level of logistics, training, and client information materials would help address barriers to the integration of midwives into the provision and recommendation of vaccines in perinatal care across Canada.

"You still have that fear": Policy constraints on informed decision making about legalized cannabis use during pregnancy and lactation.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis is the most commonly used drug during pregnancy, excluding alcohol and tobacco, in the United States. Cannabis consumption during pregnancy is increasing along with greater legal and social acceptance. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative content analysis of 23 in-depth interviews with pregnant and lactating people in Massachusetts, a state that legalized cannabis for adult use in 2016. Our aim was to explore how policy constrains or facilitates people's ability to make informed decisions about cannabis use during pregnancy and lactation. Our analysis was conducted using an ecosocial approach, recognizing that the implementation and interpretation of cannabis policy can be understood at multiple levels, which interact with each other and shape the health and experiences of individuals. Additionally, this analysis was informed by a harm reduction approach in which we acknowledge the complexity surrounding cannabis use during pregnancy and lactation, while attempting to identify ways to reduce potentially harmful consequences. RESULTS: Findings revealed that, despite the legal status of cannabis, there continues to be a lack of clarity for pregnant and lactating people regarding the legal implications of cannabis use. Inconsistent state and institutional policies about drug testing of mothers and newborns leave a cloud of fear hanging over the experiences of people who use cannabis and inhibit their ability to obtain expert advice from healthcare providers. CONCLUSION: Decision makers in public and institutional policy should work to clarify and update policies regarding substance use during pregnancy following legalization of a new substance, and ensure that pregnant and lactating people are afforded the same legal protections as the general population.

"I don't think there's a point for me to discuss it with my patients": exploring health care providers' views and behaviours regarding COVID-19 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Health care providers' knowledge and attitudes about vaccines are important determinants of their own vaccine uptake, their intention to recommend vaccines, and their patients' vaccine uptake. This qualitative study' objective was to better understand health care providers' vaccination decisions, their views on barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and proposed solutions, their opinions on vaccine policies, and their perceived role in discussing COVID-19 vaccination with patients. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews on perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines were conducted with Canadian health care providers (N = 14) in spring 2021. A qualitative thematic analysis using NVivo was conducted. RESULTS: Participants had positive attitudes toward vaccination and were vaccinated against COVID-19 or intended to do so once eligible (two delayed their first dose). Only two were actively promoting COVID-19 vaccination to their patients; others either avoided discussing the topic or only provided answers when asked questions. Participants' proposed solutions to enhance COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the public were in relation to access to vaccination services, information in multiple languages, and community outreach. Most participants were in favor of mandatory vaccination policies and had mixed views on the potential impact of the Canadian vaccine-injury support program. CONCLUSIONS: While health care providers are recognized as a key source of information regarding vaccines, participants in our study did not consider it their role to provide advice on COVID-19 vaccination. This is a missed opportunity that could be avoided by ensuring health care providers have the tools and training to feel confident in engaging in vaccine discussions with their patients.