Population Attributable Fraction of Nonvaccination of COVID-19 Due to Vaccine Hesitancy, United States, 2021.

Understanding the extent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) nonvaccination attributable to vaccine hesitancy versus other barriers can help prioritize approaches for increasing vaccination uptake. Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Research and Development Survey, a nationally representative survey fielded from May 1 to June 30, 2021 (n = 5,458), we examined the adjusted population attribution fraction (PAF) of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy attributed to nonvaccination according to sociodemographic characteristics and health-related variables. Overall, the adjusted PAF of nonvaccination attributed to vaccine hesitancy was 76.1%. The PAF was highest among adults who were ≥50 years of age (87.9%), were non-Hispanic White (83.7%), had a bachelor's degree or higher (82.7%), had an annual household income of at least $75,000 (85.5%), were insured (82.4%), and had a usual place for health care (80.7%). The PAF was lower for those who were current smokers (65.3%) compared with never smokers (77.9%), those who had anxiety or depression (65.2%) compared with those who did not (80.1%), and those who had a disability (64.5%) compared with those who did not (79.2%). Disparities in PAF suggest areas for prioritization of efforts for intervention and development of messaging campaigns that address all barriers to uptake, including hesitancy and access, to advance health equity and protect individuals from COVID-19.

Dynamic evolution of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy over 2021-2023 among Chinese population: Repeated nationwide cross-sectional study.

Globally, the rollout of COVID-19 vaccine had been faced with a significant barrier in the form of vaccine hesitancy. This study adopts a multi-stage perspective to explore the prevalence and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, focusing on their dynamic evolutionary features. Guided by the integrated framework of the 3Cs model (complacency, confidence, and convenience) and the EAH model (environmental, agent, and host), this study conducted three repeated national cross-sectional surveys. These surveys carried out from July 2021 to February 2023 across mainland China, targeted individuals aged 18 and older. They were strategically timed to coincide with three critical vaccination phases: universal coverage (stage 1), partial coverage (stage 2), and key population coverage (stage 3). From 2021 to 2023, the surveys examined sample sizes of 29 925, 6659, and 5407, respectively. The COVID-19 vaccine hesitation rates increased from 8.39% in 2021 to 29.72% in 2023. Urban residency, chronic condition, and low trust in vaccine developer contributed to significant COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy across the pandemic. Negative correlations between the intensity of vaccination policies and vaccine hesitancy, and positive correlations between vaccine hesitancy and long COVID, were confirmed. This study provides insights for designing future effective vaccination programs for emerging vaccine-preventable infectious X diseases.

Hesitancy towards R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine among Ghanaian parents and attitudes towards immunizing non-eligible children: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The newly developed malaria vaccine called "R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine" showed a high safety and efficacy level, and Ghana is the first country to approve this new vaccine. The present study aimed to evaluate the rate of vaccine hesitancy (VH) towards the newly developed malaria vaccine among parents who currently have children who are not eligible for the vaccine but may be eligible in the near future. Additionally, the study aimed to identify the factors that could potentially influence VH. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey using both online-based questionnaires and face-to-face interviews was conducted in Ghana from June to August 2023. The survey specifically targeted parents of ineligible children for vaccination, including those aged less than 5 months or between 3 and 12 years. The Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccination (PACV) scale was used to assess parental VH. RESULTS: A total of 765 people participated in this study. Their median age was 36.0 years with an interquartile range of 31.0-41.0 years, 67.7% were females, 41.8% completed their tertiary education, 63.3% were married, 81.6% worked in non-healthcare sectors, and 59.7% reported that their monthly income was insufficient. About one-third (34.5%) of the parents were hesitant to give their children the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine. The following predictors were associated with VH: working in the healthcare sector (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30-0.80; p = 0.005), having the other parent working in the healthcare sector (AOR = 0.54; 95% CI 0.30-0.94; p = 0.034), and not taking scheduled routine vaccinations (AOR = 1.90; 95% CI 1.27-2.84; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Addressing VH is crucial for optimizing R21/Matrix-M vaccine coverage in Ghana's malaria control strategy. By tackling VH issues, Ghana can effectively safeguard children's health in malaria-prone areas.

Approximate maximum likelihood estimation in cure models using aggregated data, with application to HPV vaccine completion.

Research into vaccine hesitancy is a critical component of the public health enterprise, as rates of communicable diseases preventable by routine childhood immunization have been increasing in recent years. It is therefore important to estimate proportions of "never-vaccinators" in various subgroups of the population in order to successfully target interventions to improve childhood vaccination rates. However, due to privacy issues, it may be difficult to obtain individual patient data (IPD) needed to perform the appropriate time-to-event analyses: state-level immunization information services may only be willing to share aggregated data with researchers. We propose statistical methodology for the analysis of aggregated survival data that can accommodate a cured fraction based on a polynomial approximation of the mixture cure model log-likelihood function relying only on summary statistics. We study the performance of the method through simulation studies and apply it to a real-world data set from a study examining reminder/recall approaches to improve human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination uptake. The proposed methods may be generalized for use when there is interest in fitting complex likelihood-based models but IPD is unavailable due to data privacy or other concerns.

Expectations Versus Fantasies and Vaccine Hesitancy: How Suffering From COVID-19 Versus Suffering From Vaccines Interact.

BACKGROUND: Previous research on COVID-19 vaccination highlights future thoughts associated with possible Coronavirus infection and vaccine side effects as key predictors of vaccine hesitancy. Yet, research has focused on independent contributions of such future thoughts, neglecting their interactive aspects. PURPOSE: We examined whether thoughts about two possible COVID-related futures (suffering from COVID-19 and vaccine side effects) interactively predict vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behavior among unvaccinated and vaccinated people. Importantly, we compared two forms of future thinking: beliefs or expectations (likelihood judgments) versus fantasies (free thoughts and images describing future events). METHODS: In Study 1, we conducted a longitudinal study with an unvaccinated group (N = 210). We assessed expectations versus fantasies about the two COVID-related futures as predictors. As outcome variables, we measured vaccine hesitancy, and 9 weeks later we assessed information seeking and vaccine uptake. Study 2 was a cross-sectional study comparing vaccine hesitancy of an unvaccinated group (N = 307) to that of a vaccinated group (N = 311). RESULTS: Study 1 found that more negative fantasies about COVID-19 impact and less negative fantasies about vaccine side effects interactively predicted lower vaccine hesitancy and more vaccine-related behaviors among unvaccinated people; no such interaction was observed between respective expectations. Study 2 replicated these results of Study 1. Additionally, for vaccinated people, low expectations of negative COVID-19 impact and high expectations of negative vaccine impact interactively predicted higher vaccine hesitancy, whereas no such interaction was observed for respective fantasies. CONCLUSIONS: Research on vaccine hesitancy should explore interactions between future thinking about disease and about vaccine side effects. Importantly, there is much to be gained by distinguishing expectations versus fantasies: vaccination interventions aiming to boost vaccine uptake among unvaccinated people should tap into their negative future fantasies regarding both disease and vaccine side effects.

In two correlational studies, we investigated the relationship between future thoughts about two possible COVID-related futures­suffering from COVID-19 and vaccine side effects­and vaccine hesitancy. Prior research has emphasized thoughts about these potential risks as significant predictors of vaccine hesitancy but has focused on their independent contributions, neglecting their interactive nature. Our research examined the interaction between the thoughts about disease and those about vaccine side effects, highlighting the two forms of future thinking: expectations (likelihood judgments) and fantasies (free-flowing thoughts and images describing a future event). In a longitudinal study (Study 1) with an unvaccinated group, we found that more negative fantasies about COVID-19 disease and less negative fantasies about vaccine side effects interactively predicted lower vaccine hesitancy and more vaccination behavior. There was no interaction between the expectations. Study 2, a cross-sectional study comparing another unvaccinated sample to a vaccinated sample, revealed a divergent pattern in the two groups; negative fantasies, not expectations, interactively predicted vaccine hesitancy among unvaccinated people while expectations, not fantasies, did so among vaccinated people. The research suggests the importance of considering interactions between future thoughts about disease and vaccine side effects in understanding vaccine hesitancy and distinguishing expectations and fantasies.

Predictors of Change in Vaccination Decisions Among the Vaccine Hesitant: Examining the Roles of Age and Intolerance of Uncertainty.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy and resistance pose significant threats to controlling pandemics and preventing infectious diseases. In a group of individuals unvaccinated against the disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (COVID-19), we investigated how age, intolerance of uncertainty (IU), and their interaction affected the likelihood of having changed one's vaccination decision a year later. We hypothesized that higher IU would increase the likelihood of becoming vaccinated, particularly among individuals of younger age. We predicted that this effect would remain significant, even after controlling for delay discounting and trust in science. PURPOSE: The goal of this research was to understand the factors influencing changes in vaccination decisions among the vaccine hesitant. METHODS: In a larger longitudinal study, ~7,500 participants from Prolific.co completed demographic and vaccination status questions, a delay discounting task, and the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale in June-August 2021. Approximately 3,200 participants completed a follow-up survey in July-August 2022, answering questions about vaccination status, reasons for vaccination decision, and trust in science. We analyzed data from 251 participants who initially had no intention of getting vaccinated and completed the follow-up survey; 38% reported becoming vaccinated in the intervening year. RESULTS: Data were analyzed using multilevel logistic regression. Over and above other factors related to vaccination decisions (delay discounting, trust in science), younger participants were more likely to change their decision and become vaccinated a year later, especially if they had higher IU, confirming our predictions. Primary reasons for becoming vaccinated were necessity and seeking protection against the virus. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the complex interplay between age, uncertainty, and vaccination decisions, and inform health policies by suggesting the need for tailoring interventions to specific concerns in different age groups.

Vaccine hesitancy and resistance pose significant threats to controlling pandemics and preventing infectious diseases. It is important to understand the factors that influence whether or not unvaccinated individuals change their mind and get vaccinated. We investigated how age and one's intolerance of uncertainty predicted the likelihood of changing one's mind about getting a COVID-19 vaccination in a group of 251 unvaccinated participants. In mid-2021, these individuals indicated they had no intention to get vaccinated; by mid-2022, 38% of them reported that they had been vaccinated. Over and above other factors known to be related to vaccination decisions (delay discounting and trust in science), we found that younger participants were more likely to have changed their minds and become vaccinated a year later, especially if they were less tolerant of uncertainty. Of the reasons provided by participants for having been vaccinated, necessity and seeking protection against the virus were the most common. These findings highlight the complex interplay between age, uncertainty, and vaccination decisions. Importantly, these findings will inform health policies, suggesting the need for tailoring interventions to specific concerns in different age groups.

Trends in primary, booster, and updated COVID-19 vaccine readiness in the United States, January 2021-April 2023: Implications for 2023-2024 updated COVID-19 vaccines.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 vaccines have mitigated the severity of COVID-19 and its sequelae. The emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants and waning immunity conferred by COVID-19 vaccination have necessitated booster and updated COVID-19 vaccines. This study examined trends in vaccine readiness-a composite measure of intention and uptake-for the primary, booster, and 2022-2023 updated (bivalent) COVID-19 vaccines among U.S. adults. METHODS: Data from the nationally-representative U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' COVID-19 Monthly Outcome Survey from January 2021 to April 2023 were analyzed (N = 140,180). We conducted pairwise comparisons (weighted t-tests) to assess for significant between-month differences in the proportion of participants in each vaccine-readiness category (vaccine ready, wait and see, and no vaccine intention) for the following outcomes: (1) primary; (2) booster; and (3) updated COVID-19 vaccine readiness. RESULTS: From January 2021 to April 2023, significant increases in the primary vaccine ready group were accompanied by decreases in the wait and see and no vaccine intention groups (p < 0.001). From January to September 2022, the no booster intention group notably increased (p < 0.001), whereas the booster ready group decreased (p < 0.001), and the wait and see group remained stable (p = 0.116). From October 2022 to April 2023, the no updated vaccine intention group increased (p < 0.001), the wait and see group decreased (p < 0.01), and the updated vaccine ready group remained unchanged (p = 0.357). CONCLUSIONS: Findings show decreased vaccine readiness for the booster and 2022-2023 updated (bivalent) COVID-19 vaccines relative to the primary COVID-19 vaccines. Implications for the 2023-2024 updated COVID-19 vaccines are discussed.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among People Living with HIV: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Vaccine hesitancy is one of the top 10 threats to global health, which affects the prevalence and fatality of vaccine-preventable diseases over the world. During the COVID-19 pandemic, people living with HIV (PLWH) may have higher risks of infection, more serious complications, and worse prognosis without the protection of the COVID-19 vaccine. A systematic review and meta-analysis aiming to evaluate the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLWH was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for studies published between January 1, 2020, and August 31, 2022. The pooled prevalence with a corresponding 95%CI of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLWH was reported. Subgroup analysis was conducted to explore variation in prevalence across different categories. 23 studies with a total of 19,922 PLWH were included in this study. The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLWH was 34.0%, and the influencing factors included male, influenza vaccination experience, and a CD4 count of more than 200 cells/mm3. Subgroup analysis did not identify significant causes of heterogeneity but showed that the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLWH varies by study period, region, and race. Although all PLWH are recommended to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, a large proportion of them remain hesitant to be vaccinated. Therefore, governments and relevant institutions should take specific measures to encourage and promote vaccination to improve the coverage of the COVID-19 vaccine among PLWH.

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Hesitancy among People Living with HIV: Review and Meta-Analysis.

This study aims to estimate the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among people living with HIV (PLWHA). A search for observational studies was conducted in five databases and preprinted literature. Summary estimates were pooled using a random effects model and meta-regression. Of 150 identified studies, 31 were eligible (18,550 PLWHA). The weighted prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy overall was 29.07% among PLWHA (95%CI = 24.33-34.32; I² = 98%,) and that of vaccine acceptance was 68.66% (95%CI = 62.25-74.43; I² = 98%). Higher hesitancy prevalence was identified in low/lower-middle income countries (35.05; 95% CI = 19.38-54.78). The heterogeneity was explained by the risk of bias, region, and year of data collection. The findings conclude that the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy rate remains high, especially in low-income countries. Evidence-informed interventions aimed at increasing COVID-19 vaccine acceptance at the national and individual levels ought to be designed to increase COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among PLWHA.

Barriers to vaccine acceptance in the adult population of mainland Finland, 2021.

There has been a lack of information on vaccine acceptance for Finnish adults. We conducted a secondary analysis of cross-sectional data collected through the Finnish Medicines Agency Medicine Barometer 2021 survey (response rate: 20.6%). We described and explained vaccine acceptance by investigating the associations between socio-demographic factors and statements using logistic regression and conducted a factor analysis. The majority of respondents (n = 2081) considered vaccines to be safe (93%), effective (97%), and important (95%). However, 20% and 14% felt they did not have enough information about vaccines and vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs), respectively. Respondents aged 18-39 were 2.8 times more likely to disagree that they had enough information about VPDs compared to respondents aged 60-79 (p < 0.001), while respondents with poorer self-perceived health were 1.8 times more likely to declare not having enough information about vaccines (p < 0.001). We generated three-factor dimensions from the eight statements. They were related to 'Confidence and attitudes towards vaccines', 'Access to information on vaccines and VPDs', and 'Debate on vaccine issues', which may reflect the underlying thinking patterns. Access to and understanding of information about vaccines and VPDs need to be improved for Finnish adults to increase vaccine acceptance and uptake, thus preventing the spread of VPDs.

Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake: an online three-wave survey study of US adults.

BACKGROUND: To effectively promote vaccine uptake, it is important to understand which people are most and least inclined to be vaccinated and why. In this study, we examined predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake and reasons for non-vaccination. METHODS: We conducted an online English-language survey study in December-2020, January-2021, and March-2021. A total of 930 US respondents completed all surveys. Multiple logistic regression models were run to test whether the early vaccine eligibility, demographic factors, and psychological factors predict getting at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccination in January-2021 and in March-2021. RESULTS: The proportion of respondents who received ≥ 1-dose of a COVID-19 vaccine increased from 18% (January) to 67% (March). Older age predicted vaccine uptake in January (OR = 2.02[95%CI = 1.14-3.78], p < .001) and March (10.92[6.76-18.05], p < .001). In January, additional predictors were higher numeracy (1.48[1.20-1.86], p < .001), COVID-19 risk perceptions (1.35[1.03-1.78], p = .029), and believing it is important adults get the COVID-19 vaccine (1.66[1.05-2.66], p = .033). In March, additional predictors of uptake were believing it is important adults get the COVID-19 vaccine (1.63[1.15-2.34], p = .006), prior COVID-19 vaccine intentions (1.37[1.10-1.72], p = .006), and belief in science (0.84[0.72-0.99], p = .041). Concerns about side effects and the development process were the most common reasons for non-vaccination. Unvaccinated respondents with no interest in getting a COVID-19 vaccine were younger (0.27[0.09-0.77], p = .016), held negative views about COVID-19 vaccines for adults (0.15[0.08-0.26], p < .001), had lower trust in healthcare (0.59[0.36-0.95], p = .032), and preferred to watch and wait in clinically ambiguous medical situations (0.66[0.48-0.89], p = .007). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence that attitudes and intentions towards COVID-19 vaccines were important predictors of uptake provides validation for studies using these measures and reinforces the need to develop strategies for addressing safety and development concerns which remain at the forefront of vaccine hesitancy.

Factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake in populations with higher education: insights from a cross-sectional study among university students in Malawi.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccines were rolled out in many countries; however, sub-optimal COVID-19 vaccine uptake remains a major public health concern globally. This study aimed at assessing the factors that affected the uptake, hesitancy, and resistance of the COVID-19 vaccine among university undergraduate students in Malawi, a least developed country in Africa. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study design was conducted using an online semi-structured questionnaire. A total of 343 University undergraduate students in Blantyre participated in this study after obtaining ethical clearance. Data was exported from Survey Monkey to Microsoft Excel version-21 for cleaning and was analysed using SPSS version-29. Descriptive statistics, including percentages, were performed to define the sample characteristics. Pearson Chi-square and Fisher's exact test were performed to identify significant relationships between vaccine uptake and demographics. A 95% confidence interval was set, and a p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Of the 343 participants, 43% were vaccinated. Among the vaccinated, the majority (47.3%, n = 69/146) received Johnson & Johnson vaccine followed by AstraZeneca (46.6%, n = 68/146). The commonly reported reason for vaccine acceptance was 'to protect me against getting COVID-19' (49%); whereas vaccine hesitancy was attributed to 'lack of knowledge (34%), and concerns about vaccine safety (25%). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that adequate knowledge about benefits and safety of COVID-19 vaccine could potentially increase uptake. Lack of credible information or misinformation contributed to vaccine hesitancy. The findings provide insights for design of strategies to increase future vaccine uptake and reduce determinants of vaccine hesitancy. To reduce vaccination hesitancy in any population with or without higher education, we recommend that institutions entrusted with vaccine management must optimise health messaging, and reduce mis-information and dis-information.

Information and vaccine hesitancy: The role of broadband Internet.

We examine the effect of Internet diffusion on the uptake of an important public health intervention: the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine. We study England between 2000 and 2011 when Internet diffusion spread rapidly and there was a high profile medical article (falsely) linking the MMR vaccine to autism. OLS estimates suggest Internet diffusion led to an increase in vaccination rates. This result is reversed after allowing for endogeneity of Internet access. The effect of Internet diffusion is sizable. A one standard deviation increase in Internet penetration led to around a 20% decrease in vaccination rates. Localities characterized by higher proportions of high skilled individuals and lower deprivation levels had a larger response to Internet diffusion. These findings are consistent with higher skilled and less-deprived parents responding faster to false information that the vaccine could lead to autism.

Vaccine-skeptic physicians and patient vaccination decisions.

What is the role of general practitioners (GPs) in supporting or hindering public health efforts? We investigate the influence of vaccine-skeptic GPs on their patients' decisions to get a COVID-19 vaccination. We identify vaccine-skeptic GPs from the signatories of an open letter in which 199 Austrian physicians expressed their skepticism about COVID-19 vaccines. We examine small rural municipalities where patients choose a GP primarily based on geographic proximity. These vaccine-skeptic GPs reduced the vaccination rate by 5.6 percentage points. This estimate implies that they discouraged 7.9% of the vaccinable population. The effect appears to stem from discouragement rather than rationing vaccine access.

Vaccine hesitancy and equity: lessons learned from the past and how they affect the COVID-19 countermeasure in Indonesia.

INTRODUCTION: Indonesia has made progress in increasing vaccine coverage, but equitable access remains challenging, especially in remote areas. Despite including vaccines in the National Immunization Program (NIP), coverage has not met WHO and UNICEF targets, with childhood immunization decreasing during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 vaccination has also experienced hesitancy, slowing efforts to end the pandemic. SCOPE: This article addresses the issue of vaccine hesitancy and its impact on vaccination initiatives amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. This article utilizes the vaccine hesitancy framework to analyze previous outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases and their underlying causes, ultimately providing recommendations for addressing the current situation. The analysis considers the differences between the pre-pandemic circumstances and the present and considers the implementation of basic and advanced strategies. KEY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION: Vaccine hesitancy is a significant challenge in the COVID-19 pandemic, and public health campaigns and community engagement efforts are needed to promote vaccine acceptance and uptake. Efforts to address vaccine hesitancy promote trust in healthcare systems and increase the likelihood of individuals seeking preventive health services. Vaccine hesitancy requires a comprehensive, culturally sensitive approach that considers local contexts and realities. Strategies should be tailored to specific cultural and societal contexts and monitored and evaluated.

Willingness and hesitancy towards the governmental free human papillomavirus vaccination among parents of eligible adolescent girls in Shenzhen, Southern China.

BACKGROUND: Since 2020, China has actively promoted HPV vaccination for eligible adolescent girls through various pilot programmes. This study investigated parental willingness and hesitancy towards the government-sponsored, free human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for eligible adolescent girls in Shenzhen, Southern China. METHODS: From June to August 2022, a cross-sectional survey was conducted with parents of girls entering Grade 7, employing an adapted Vaccine Hesitancy Scale to assess vaccine hesitancy and logistic regression to identify factors influencing willingness to accept the free domestic vaccines. RESULTS: Although only 3.4% of the 2856 respondents had their daughters vaccinated against HPV prior to the survey, 91.7% were willing to utilise the governmental vaccination services. Parents with children in public schools (χ2 = 20.08, p < 0.001), those with more secure medical insurance (χ2 = 4.97, p = 0.026), and parents who had received an HPV vaccine themselves (χ2 = 28.829, p < 0.001) showed more reluctance towards the free vaccines. Vaccine hesitancy was presented in a mere 2.1% but was a significant predictor of vaccine refusal, even after adjusting for multiple factors (adjusted OR = 15.98, 95% CI: 9.06, 28.20). Notably, about four-fifths of parents of unvaccinated daughters harboured concerns about the safety and efficacy of the domestic vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Although parents show a strong inclination to utilise the government vaccination services, their vaccine hesitancy, driven by safety concerns and a preference for imported vaccines, remains a significant barrier for rolling out vaccination coverage. This study highlights the need for multifaceted intervention strategies that address these issues to enhance HPV vaccine uptake effectively.

Concerns about vaccines and vaccination behavior among Japanese budget travelers to India.

BACKGROUND: Low vaccination coverage among travelers poses a critical challenge to global health security. Indeed, public concerns regarding vaccines can lead to vaccine reluctance and refusal, but evidence about the impacts of concerns regarding vaccines on the uptake of travel vaccinations remains sparse. We examined the associations between concerns about vaccines and vaccination behavior among travelers. METHODS: Japanese travelers aged 18 years or older, who stayed at a guesthouse in New Delhi, India, were targeted (n = 153). We conducted cross-sectional surveys from August 23 to September 2, 2019, and from February 19 to March 5, 2020. We examined the associations of three concerns regarding vaccines (5-point scale)-serious side effects from vaccines, vaccine safety, and vaccine effectiveness-with the uptake of travel vaccinations. RESULTS: In total, 60 participants (39.2 %) had been vaccinated for this or a past trip. After adjusting for all potential confounding variables, concerns about serious side effects from vaccines and vaccine safety were negatively associated with the uptake of travel vaccinations. The ORs (95 % CIs) for 1-point increases in concerns about serious side effects from vaccines and vaccine safety were 0.72 (0.52, 0.99) and 0.71 (0.52, 0.96), respectively. Sensitivity analyses did not change the results substantially. CONCLUSIONS: Concerns about vaccine safety issues were negatively associated with the uptake of travel vaccinations among the participants, with no corresponding association observed for vaccine effectiveness. Addressing concerns about vaccine safety issues, rather than vaccine effectiveness may contribute to an increased uptake of travel vaccinations.

Uptake of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines in relation to preexisting chronic conditions in the European countries.

BACKGROUND: The suboptimal uptake of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines among those with non-communicable chronic diseases is a public health concern, because it poses a higher risk of severe illness for individuals with underlying health conditions, emphasizing the need to address barriers to vaccination and ensure adequate protection for this vulnerable population. In the present study, we aimed to identify whether people with chronic illnesses are more likely to get vaccinated against COVID-19 and influenza in the European Union. METHODS: Cross-sectional data on 49,253 men (n = 20,569) and women (n = 28,684) were obtained from the ninth round of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (June - August, 2021). The outcome variables were self-reported COVID-19 and influenza vaccine uptake status. The association between the uptake of the vaccines and six preexisting conditions including high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, chronic lung disease, diabetes, chronic bronchitis, and asthma was estimated using binary logistic regression methods. RESULTS: The vaccination coverage for COVID-19 ranged from close to 100% in Denmark (98.2%) and Malta (98.2%) to less than 50% in Bulgaria (19.1%) and Romania (32.7%). The countries with the highest percentage of participants with the influenza vaccine included Malta (66.7%), Spain (63.7%) and the Netherlands (62.5%), and those with the lowest percentage included Bulgaria (3.7%), Slovakia (5.8%) and Poland (9.2%). Participants with high blood pressure were 3% less likely [Risk difference (RD) = -0.03, 95% CI = -0.04, -0.03] to report taking COVID-19 and influenza [RD = -0.03, 95% CI= -0.04, -0.01] vaccine. Those with chronic lung disease were 4% less likely [RD = -0.04, 95% CI= -0.06, -0.03] to report taking COVID-19 and 2% less likely [RD= -0.02, 95% CI = -0.04, -0.01] to report taking influenza vaccine. Men and women with high blood pressure were 3% less likely to have reported taking both of the vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: Current findings indicate a suboptimal uptake of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines among adult men and women in the EU countries. Those with preexisting conditions, including high blood pressure and chronic lung disease are less likely to take the vaccines.

The experience of traumatic events, psychological distress, and social support: links to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and trends with age in a group of older Australians.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is important to reduce disease-associated morbidity and mortality in an ageing global population. While older adults are more likely than younger adults to accept vaccines, some remain hesitant. We sought to understand how traumatic events, psychological distress and social support contribute to older adults' intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and whether these experiences change with age. METHODS: We analysed survey data collected as part of the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study in a population of Australian adults aged 60 years and over. Data were derived from the COVID Insights study; a series of supplementary surveys about how participants experienced the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Higher intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine was associated with greater social support (adjusted odds ratio (aOR):1.08; 95%CI:1.06-1.11; p <.001) while lower intention was associated with personally experiencing a serious illness, injury or assault in the last 12 months (aOR:0.79; 95% CI:0.64-0.98; p =.03). Social support and the experience of traumatic events increased significantly with age, while psychological distress decreased. CONCLUSIONS: There may be factors beyond disease-associated risks that play a role in vaccine acceptance with age. Older Australians on the younger end of the age spectrum may have specific needs to address their hesitancy that may be overlooked.

Trust matters: The Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in Europe Study.

This article presents the design of a seven-country study focusing on childhood vaccines, Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in Europe (VAX-TRUST), developed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study consists of (a) situation analysis of vaccine hesitancy (examination of individual, socio-demographic and macro-level factors of vaccine hesitancy and analysis of media coverage on vaccines and vaccination and (b) participant observation and in-depth interviews of healthcare professionals and vaccine-hesitant parents. These analyses were used to design interventions aimed at increasing awareness on the complexity of vaccine hesitancy among healthcare professionals involved in discussing childhood vaccines with parents. We present the selection of countries and regions, the conceptual basis of the study, details of the data collection and the process of designing and evaluating the interventions, as well as the potential impact of the study. Laying out our research design serves as an example of how to translate complex public health issues into social scientific study and methods.