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.

Message Fatigue and COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Uptake in the United States.

Dissemination of public health information plays an essential role in communicable disease control and prevention. However, widespread and repeated messaging could become counterproductive if it leads to avoidance and disengagement due to message fatigue. Americans have been inundated with accurate and inaccurate COVID-19 information from myriad sources since the start of the pandemic. Using the health belief model (HBM) as a guiding framework, this study examines COVID-19-related message fatigue among adults in the United States who have gotten at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine and the association between message fatigue and COVID-19 booster uptake and intentions. A special survey module of The COVID States Project was fielded between August and September 2022 (n = 16,546). Results showed moderately high levels of message fatigue among vaccinated individuals. Message fatigue was negatively associated with the likelihood of having gotten a COVID-19 booster and intentions to do so among those who had not yet received a booster, above and beyond variance explained by the HBM constructs. These findings underscore the importance of monitoring and mitigating COVID-19-related message fatigue in encouraging the public to stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccination.

The Association Between the We Can Do This Campaign and Vaccination Beliefs in the United States, January 2021-March 2022.

Public health campaigns addressing COVID-19 vaccination beliefs may be effective in changing COVID-19 vaccination behaviors, particularly among people who remain vaccine hesitant. The "We Can Do This" COVID-19 public education campaign (the Campaign) was designed to increase COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake. This study aims to evaluate whether Campaign dose was associated with changes in vaccination beliefs related to COVID-19 vaccine concerns and perceived risks, the importance of COVID-19 vaccines, the perceived benefits of COVID-19 vaccination, normative beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination, and perceptions about general vaccine safety and effectiveness. The study linked data from four waves of a nationally representative longitudinal panel of U.S. adults (January 2021-March 2022) with Campaign paid digital media data (April 2021-May 2022). We used mixed-effects linear regressions to examine the association between Campaign paid digital impressions and changes in vaccination beliefs. The results provide evidence that Campaign digital impressions were significantly associated with changes in respondent beliefs regarding COVID-19 vaccine concerns and perceived risks, perceived benefits of COVID-19 vaccination, and perceptions about general vaccine safety and effectiveness. Findings suggest that public education campaigns may influence vaccine confidence and uptake by increasing positive vaccination beliefs and reducing vaccine concerns.

Association Between the United States Department of Health and Human Services' COVID-19 Public Education Campaign and Initial Adult COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake by Race and Ethnicity in the United States, 2020-2022.

Non-Hispanic Black (Black) and Hispanic/Latino (Latino) populations face an increased risk of COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19 relative to non-Hispanic White (White) populations. When COVID-19 vaccines became available in December 2020, Black and Latino adults were less likely than White adults to get vaccinated due to factors such as racial discrimination and structural barriers to uptake. In April 2021, the U.S. HHS COVID-19 public education campaign (the Campaign) was launched to promote vaccination through general and audience-tailored messaging. As of March 2022, Black and Latino adults had reached parity with White adults in COVID-19 vaccine uptake. This study evaluated the relationship between Campaign exposure and subsequent vaccine uptake among Black, Latino, and White adults in the United States and assessed whether participant race/ethnicity moderated the relationship between Campaign exposure and vaccine uptake. Campaign media delivery data was merged with survey data collected from a sample of U.S. adults (n = 2,923) over four waves from January 2021 to March 2022. Logistic regression analysis showed that cumulative Campaign digital impressions had a positive, statistically significant association with COVID-19 vaccine uptake, and that participant race/ethnicity moderated this association. Compared with White adults, the magnitude of the relationship between cumulative impressions and vaccination was greater among Black and Latino adults. Results from a simulation model suggested that the Campaign may have been responsible for closing 5.0% of the gap in COVID-19 vaccination by race/ethnicity from April to mid-September 2021. We discuss implications for future public education campaigns that aim to reduce health disparities.

Recalled Exposure to COVID-19 Public Education Campaign Advertisements Predicts COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence.

This study examined the relationship between recalled exposure to the We Can Do This COVID-19 Public Education Campaign (the Campaign) and COVID-19 vaccine confidence (the likelihood of vaccination or vaccine uptake) in the general population, including vaccine-hesitant adults (the "Movable Middle"). Analyses used three waves of a triannual, nationally representative panel survey of adults in the U.S. fielded from January to November 2021 (n = 3,446). Proportional odds regression results demonstrated a positive, statistically significant relationship between past 4-month Campaign recall and vaccine confidence, controlling for lagged reports of Campaign recall and vaccine confidence; concurrent and lagged fictional campaign recall; survey wave; and sociodemographics. Results indicated that as one moves from no Campaign recall to infrequent recall, there is a 29% increase in the odds of being in a higher vaccine confidence category. Findings offer evidence of the impact of a COVID-19 public education campaign on increasing vaccine confidence.

Evaluation of the "We Can Do This" Campaign Paid Media and COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake, United States, December 2020-January 2022.

Public education campaigns are promising methods for promoting vaccine uptake. In April 2021, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services launched the We Can Do This COVID-19 public education campaign. This study is one of the first evaluations of this COVID-19 public education campaign. We tested associations between channel-specific campaign exposure (i.e. digital, TV, radio, print, and out-of-home advertising) and COVID-19 first-dose vaccinations among a nationally representative online sample of 3,278 adults. The study introduces novel ways to simultaneously evaluate short- and long-term cumulative media dose, filling an important gap in campaign evaluation literature. We observed a positive, statistically significant relationship between the short-term change in digital media dose and the likelihood of first-dose vaccination, and a positive, statistically significant relationship between long-term cumulative TV dose and the likelihood of first-dose vaccination. Results suggest that both digital and TV ads contributed to vaccination, such that digital media was associated with more immediate behavioral changes, whereas TV gradually shifted behaviors over time. As findings varied by media channel, this study suggests that public education campaigns should consider delivering campaign messages across multiple media channels to enhance campaign reach across audiences.

The Initial Relationship Between the United States Department of Health and Human Services' Digital COVID-19 Public Education Campaign and Vaccine Uptake: Campaign Effectiveness Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Over 1 million people in the United States have died of COVID-19. In response to this public health crisis, the US Department of Health and Human Services launched the We Can Do This public education campaign in April 2021 to increase vaccine confidence. The campaign uses a mix of digital, television, print, radio, and out-of-home channels to reach target audiences. However, the impact of this campaign on vaccine uptake has not yet been assessed. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to address this gap by assessing the association between the We Can Do This COVID-19 public education campaign's digital impressions and the likelihood of first-dose COVID-19 vaccination among US adults. METHODS: A nationally representative sample of 3642 adults recruited from a US probability panel was surveyed over 3 waves (wave 1: January to February 2021; wave 2: May to June 2021; and wave 3: September to November 2021) regarding COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine confidence, and sociodemographics. Survey data were merged with weekly paid digital campaign impressions delivered to each respondent's media market (designated market area [DMA]) during that period. The unit of analysis was the survey respondent-broadcast week, with respondents nested by DMA. Data were analyzed using a multilevel logit model with varying intercepts by DMA and time-fixed effects. RESULTS: The We Can Do This digital campaign was successful in encouraging first-dose COVID-19 vaccination. The findings were robust to multiple modeling specifications, with the independent effect of the change in the campaign's digital dose remaining practically unchanged across all models. Increases in DMA-level paid digital campaign impressions in a given week from -30,000 to 30,000 increased the likelihood of first-dose COVID-19 vaccination by 125%. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study provide initial evidence of the We Can Do This campaign's digital impact on vaccine uptake. The size and length of the Department of Health and Human Services We Can Do This public education campaign make it uniquely situated to examine the impact of a digital campaign on COVID-19 vaccination, which may help inform future vaccine communication efforts and broader public education efforts. These findings suggest that campaign digital dose is positively associated with COVID-19 vaccination uptake among US adults; future research assessing campaign impact on reduced COVID-19-attributed morbidity and mortality and other benefits is recommended. This study indicates that digital channels have played an important role in the COVID-19 pandemic response. Digital outreach may be integral in addressing future pandemics and could even play a role in addressing nonpandemic public health crises.

Oncology patients' communication experiences during COVID-19: comparing telehealth consultations to in-person visits.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic created significant disruptions in cancer care, much of which was transitioned to telehealth. Because telehealth alters the way clinicians and patients interact with one another, this investigation examined patients' perceptions of their communication with clinicians during the pandemic. METHOD: Patients were recruited from the Cancer Support Community, Fight Colorectal Cancer, and a market research firm to participate in an online survey. In addition to demographic and health-related information, respondents completed measures of patient-centered communication and evaluated how their communication in telehealth sessions compared with in-person visits. RESULTS: From October to December 2020, 227 respondents (65.6% female, 64.6% Non-Hispanic White, 33.5% had 6 or more telehealth sessions, 55% were 50 or older) reported having some of their cancer care provided via telehealth. Respondents who were of racial/ethnic minorities, male, had more telehealth sessions, or had poorer mental health reported less patient-centered communication with clinicians. Most patients thought communication in telehealth sessions was "about the same" as in-person visits with respect to good communication (59%). However, patients thinking communication in telehealth sessions was "better" than in-person visits were more likely to be Hispanic (49%), Non-Hispanic Black (41%), under 50 years of age (32%), male (40%), and had more telehealth sessions (34%). CONCLUSION: Respondents reporting less patient-centered communication during the pandemic-e.g., persons of racial/ethnic minorities and males-were also more likely to evaluate communication in telehealth sessions as better than in-person visits. Further research is needed to understand reasons underlying this finding. Cancer care clinicians should take into account patient preferences regarding telehealth care, which may be particularly important for racial and ethnic minority patients.

Do Longitudinal Trends in Tobacco 21-Related Media Coverage Correlate with Policy Support? an Exploratory Analysis Using Supervised and Unsupervised Machine Learning Methods.

Media coverage can impact support for health policies and, ultimately, compliance with those policies. Prior research found consistent, high support for Tobacco 21 policies, which raise the minimum legal age of tobacco purchase to 21, among adults and nonsmoking youth. However, a recent study found support (i.e., agreement with the statement: "The legal age to buy tobacco cigarettes should be increased from 18 to 21") among 13-20-year-old smokers increased from 2014 until mid-2016 and then declined steadily through mid-2017. To assess whether media coverage could be related to young smokers' changing support, we conducted an exploratory content analysis to identify texts about Tobacco 21 in a large corpus of tobacco texts (N = 135,691) published in four popular media sources from 2014 to 2017. For this content analysis, we developed a novel methodological approach that combined supervised and unsupervised machine learning methods and could be useful in other areas of communication research. We found that the prevalence of Tobacco 21 media coverage and Tobacco 21 support among young smokers exhibited similar temporal patterns for much of the study period. These findings highlight the need for continued research into the effects of media coverage on Tobacco 21 support among young smokers, a group that must comply with Tobacco 21 policies in order to ensure maximum effectiveness. This research is of particular utility following the 2019 passage of a federal Tobacco 21 regulation, as the public health impact of this regulation could be limited by low public support, and thus low rates of policy compliance.

Identifying Promising Messages to Increase Hurricane Mitigation Among Coastal Homeowners in the United States.

Hurricanes threaten the physical and financial well-being of coastal residents throughout the United States. Though hurricane-related losses are largely avoidable through property mitigation (e.g., structural modifications to existing homes), few homeowners invest in mitigation. Communication campaigns, which have influenced risk-related behaviors in other domains, hold promise for persuading coastal residents to engage in hurricane mitigation. The development of successful campaign messages relies, in part, on formative research to assess the potential influence of candidate message strategies. We present results from mixed-methods, theory-driven research to identify promising beliefs for persuading homeowners in coastal/coastal-adjacent regions of Alabama and Florida to install a high wind-resistant (HWR) roof. In Study 1, we elicited homeowners' (n = 74) salient behavioral, normative, and control beliefs about installing an HWR roof. Using established procedures, we content analyzed open-ended responses and categorized them by thematic content. In Study 2, we surveyed another sample of homeowners (n = 533) to examine the extent to which salient beliefs/themes about installing an HWR roof (elicited in Study 1) are promising targets for a communication campaign, given their associations with homeowners' intentions to retrofit. Results demonstrate that across elicited beliefs, common themes include the protection and property resilience reroofing affords, and anticipated expenses and financial barriers associated with reroofing. The most promising beliefs include behavioral beliefs that installing an HWR roof will protect oneself and one's family, and normative beliefs about the likelihood that one's family and community will install an HWR roof. We discuss the implications of findings for the development of hurricane mitigation messaging.

The Relationship Between Exogenous Exposure to "The Real Cost" Anti-Smoking Campaign and Campaign-Targeted Beliefs.

Though previous evaluations of "The Real Cost" anti-smoking campaign demonstrate effects on anti-smoking beliefs and behaviors, results rely on self-reported recall as a measure of exposure and are thus open to reverse causation concerns. Exogenous measures of exposure, assessed independently of outcomes, support stronger causal inferences. In this study, we examined the relationship between Target Rating Points (TRPs) for specific ads available over four-week periods and anti-smoking beliefs in a national sample of adolescent nonsmokers and experimenters (n = 4,780). Results demonstrate positive relationships between TRPs for ads targeting two of four belief categories tested (Control and Chemical; p < .05) and targeted-belief endorsement. Furthermore, moderation models indicate that ad-specific TRPs affected targeted beliefs more than non-targeted beliefs for those Control- and Chemical-targeted ads (p < .01). Findings support a claim of campaign effects while reducing concerns about reverse causal direction and the influence of unmeasured confounders.

Combining Crowd-Sourcing and Automated Content Methods to Improve Estimates of Overall Media Coverage: Theme Mentions in E-cigarette and Other Tobacco Coverage.

Exposure to media content can shape public opinions about tobacco. Accurately describing content is a first step to showing such effects. Historically, content analyses have hand-coded tobacco-focused texts from a few media sources which ignored passing mention coverage and social media sources, and could not reliably capture over-time variation. By using a combination of crowd-sourced and automated coding, we labeled the population of all e-cigarette and other tobacco-related (including cigarettes, hookah, cigars, etc.) 'long-form texts' (focused and passing coverage, in mass media and website articles) and social media items (tweets and YouTube videos) collected May 2014-June 2017 for four tobacco control themes. Automated coding of theme coverage met thresholds for item-level precision and recall, event validation, and weekly-level reliability for most sources, except YouTube. Health, Policy, Addiction and Youth themes were frequent in e-cigarette long-form focused coverage (44%-68%), but not in long-form passing coverage (5%-22%). These themes were less frequent in other tobacco coverage (long-form focused (13-32%) and passing coverage (4-11%)). Themes were infrequent in both e-cigarette (1-3%) and other tobacco tweets (2-4%). Findings demonstrate that passing e-cigarette and other tobacco long-form coverage and social media sources paint different pictures of theme coverage than focused long-form coverage. Automated coding also allowed us to code the amount of data required to estimate reliable weekly theme coverage over three years. E-cigarette theme coverage showed much more week-to-week variation than did other tobacco coverage. Automated coding allows accurate descriptions of theme coverage in passing mentions, social media, and trends in weekly theme coverage.

Recall of "The Real Cost" Anti-Smoking Campaign Is Specifically Associated With Endorsement of Campaign-Targeted Beliefs.

Though previous research suggests the FDA's "The Real Cost" anti-smoking campaign has reduced smoking initiation, the theorized pathway of effects (through targeted beliefs) has not been evaluated. This study assesses the relationship between recall of campaign television advertisements and ad-specific anti-smoking beliefs. Respondents in a nationally representative survey of nonsmoking youths age 13-17 (n = 4,831) reported exposure to four The Real Cost advertisements and a fake ad, smoking-relevant beliefs, and nonsmoking intentions. Analyses separately predicted each targeted belief from specific ad recall, adjusting for potential confounders and survey weights. Parallel analyses with non-targeted beliefs showed smaller effects, strengthening claims of campaign effects. Recall of four campaign ads (but not the fake ad) significantly predicted endorsement of the ad-targeted belief (Mean ß = .13). Two-sided sign tests indicated stronger ad recall associations with the targeted belief relative to the non-targeted belief (p < .05). Logistic regression analyses indicated that respondents who endorsed campaign-targeted beliefs were more likely to have no intention to smoke (p < .01). This study is the first to demonstrate a relationship between recall of ads from The Real Cost campaign and the theorized pathway of effects (through targeted beliefs). These analyses also provide a methodological template for showing campaign effects despite limitations of available data.

Analyzing Google COVID-19 Vaccine Intent Search Trends and Vaccine Readiness in the United States: Panel Data Study.

BACKGROUND: Factors such as anxiety, worry, and perceptions of insufficient knowledge about a topic motivate individuals to seek web-based health information to guide their health-related decision-making. These factors converged during the COVID-19 pandemic and were linked to COVID-19 vaccination decision-making. While research shows that web-based search relevant to COVID-19 was associated with subsequent vaccine uptake, less is known about COVID-19 vaccine intent search (which assesses vaccine availability, accessibility, and eligibility) as a signal of vaccine readiness. OBJECTIVE: To increase knowledge about vaccine intent search as a signal of vaccine readiness, we investigated the relationship between COVID-19 vaccine readiness and COVID-19 vaccine intent relative search volume on Google. METHODS: We compiled panel data from several data sources in all US counties between January 2021 and April 2023, a time during which those with primary COVID-19 vaccinations increased from <57,000 to >230 million adults. We estimated a random effects generalized least squares regression model with time-fixed effects to assess the relationship between county-level COVID-19 vaccine readiness and COVID-19 vaccine intent relative search volume. We controlled for health care capacity, per capita COVID-19 cases and vaccination doses administered, and sociodemographic indicators. RESULTS: The county-level proportions of unvaccinated adults who reported that they would wait and see before getting a COVID-19 vaccine were positively associated with COVID-19 vaccine intent relative search volume (ß=9.123; Z=3.59; P<.001). The county-level proportions of vaccine-enthusiast adults, adults who indicated they were either already vaccinated with a primary COVID-19 vaccine series or planned to complete the vaccine series soon, were negatively associated with COVID-19 vaccine intent relative search volume (ß=-10.232; Z=-7.94; P<.001). However, vaccine intent search was higher in counties with high proportions of people who decided to wait and see and lower in counties with high proportions of vaccine enthusiasts. CONCLUSIONS: During this period of steep increase in COVID-19 vaccination, web-based search may have signaled differences in county-level COVID-19 vaccine readiness. More vaccine intent searches occurred in high wait-and-see counties, whereas fewer vaccine intent searches occurred in high vaccine-enthusiast counties. Considering previous research that identified a relationship between vaccine intent search and subsequent vaccine uptake, these findings suggest that vaccine intent search aligned with people's transition from the wait-and-see stage to the vaccine-enthusiast stage. The findings also suggest that web-based search trends may signal localized changes in information seeking and decision-making antecedent to vaccine uptake. Changes in web-based search trends illuminate opportunities for governments and other organizations to strategically allocate resources to increase vaccine uptake. Resource use is part of the larger public policy decisions that influence vaccine uptake, such as efforts to educate the public during evolving public health crises, including future pandemics.

Racial and ethnic differences in COVID-19 vaccine readiness among adults in the United States, January 2021-April 2023.

Racial and ethnic minority groups have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 and have experienced systemic, attitudinal, and access-related barriers to COVID-19 vaccination. We examined differences in COVID-19 vaccine readiness-a composite measure of vaccination intention and behavior-between non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, non-Hispanic Asian American/Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaska Native U.S. adults. Using data from a cross-sectional survey administered to nationally representative samples of âˆ¼ 5,000 U.S. adults each month from January 2021 to April 2023 (n = 135,989), we conducted weighted ttests comparing the monthly percentage of participants from racial/ethnic groups who were "Vaccine Ready." Initial racial/ethnic disparities in vaccine readiness were attenuated within a 7-month period, after which adults from most minority racial/ethnic groups became equally or more vaccine ready compared to non-Hispanic White adults (p < 0.05). Findings suggest that barriers to vaccine readiness that were more prevalent in non-White racial/ethnic groups may have largely been addressed.

Evaluating the implementation of family-centered substance use treatment for pregnant and postpartum people: A mixed-methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Family-centered substance use treatment (FCSUT) approaches for pregnant and postpartum people have the potential to prevent intergenerational transmission of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). Guided by two theoretical frameworks drawn from implementation science (the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research [CFIR] and the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance [RE-AIM] framework), this study used a mixed methods approach to answer: (1) What is the extent to which FCSUT approaches are offered for pregnant and postpartum people seeking substance use disorder (SUD) treatment? and (2) How are FCSUT approaches for pregnant and postpartum people implemented? METHODS: This study utilized a sequential mixed methods design that began with quantitative data collection followed by qualitative data collection. The quantitative component consisted of service provision surveys of facilities that provided FCSUT to pregnant and postpartum people (n = 118). The qualitative component consisted of semi-structured in-depth interviews with administrators and providers working at FCSUT facilities (n = 26) and pregnant and postpartum people who were currently receiving or had previously received services in the last two years from FCSUT facilities (n = 27). The qualitative findings were used to deepen understanding of the quantitative findings. RESULTS: Findings from the quantitative survey of treatment facilities' FCSUT provision revealed that while most facilities offered services related to substance use treatment, behavioral health, and parenting skills development or parent training, a smaller proportion offered services related to prenatal and postpartum health, sexual and reproductive health, and family-related services. Qualitative in-depth interviews with program administrators and providers and pregnant and postpartum people who had participated in FCSUT programs revealed major themes around expanding reach of facilities by maintaining participants' familial connections, resources for implementation and maintenance of FCSUT, the importance of program adaptation, and gaps in service delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicated there is a wide range of FCSUT services offered at treatment facilities across the United States. Furthermore, while many pregnant and postpartum people expressed positive experiences with FCSUT, there are some areas that should be considered for future progress to be made.

Benefit-Cost Analysis of the HHS COVID-19 Campaign: April 2021-March 2022.

INTRODUCTION: This study estimated the benefits and costs of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' We Can Do This COVID-19 public education campaign (the Campaign) and associated vaccination-related impacts. METHODS: Weekly media market and national Campaign expenditures were used to estimate weekly first-dose vaccinations that would not have occurred absent the Campaign, weekly Campaign-attributed complete vaccinations, and corresponding COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths averted. Benefits were valued using estimated morbidity and mortality reductions and associated values of a statistical life and a statistical case. Costs were estimated using Campaign paid media expenditures and corresponding vaccination costs. The net Campaign and vaccination benefit and return on investment were calculated. Analyses were conducted from 2022 to 2024. RESULTS: Between April 2021 and March 2022, an estimated 55.9 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines would not have been administered absent the Campaign. Campaign-attributed vaccinations resulted in 2,576,133 fewer mild COVID-19 cases, 243,979 fewer nonfatal COVID-19 hospitalizations, and 51,675 lives saved from COVID-19. The total Campaign benefit was $740.2 billion, and Campaign and vaccination costs totaled $8.3 billion, with net benefits of approximately $732.0 billion. For every $1 spent, the Campaign and corresponding vaccination costs resulted in benefits of approximately $89.54. CONCLUSIONS: The We Can Do This COVID-19 public education campaign saved more than 50,000 lives and prevented hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations and millions of COVID-19 cases, representing hundreds of billions of dollars in benefits in less than one year. Findings suggest that public education campaigns are a cost-effective approach to reducing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.

Association between vaccination beliefs and COVID-19 vaccine uptake in a longitudinal panel survey of adults in the United States, 2021-2022.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been a major limiting factor to the widespread uptake of COVID-19 vaccination in the United States. A range of interventions, including mass media campaigns, have been implemented to encourage COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake. Such interventions are often guided by theories of behavior change, which posit that behavioral factors, including beliefs, influence behaviors such as vaccination. Although previous studies have examined relationships between vaccination beliefs and COVID-19 vaccination behavior, they come with limitations, such as the use of cross-sectional study designs and, for longitudinal studies, few survey waves. To account for these limitations, we examined associations between vaccination beliefs and COVID-19 vaccine uptake using data from six waves of a nationally representative, longitudinal survey of U.S. adults (N = 3,524) administered over a nearly 2-year period (January 2021-November 2022). Survey-weighted lagged logistic regression models were used to examine the association between lagged reports of vaccination belief change and COVID-19 vaccine uptake, using five belief scales: (1) importance of COVID-19 vaccines, (2) perceived benefits of COVID-19 vaccination, (3) COVID-19 vaccine concerns and risks, (4) normative beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination, and (5) perceptions of general vaccine safety and effectiveness. Analyses controlled for confounding factors and accounted for within-respondent dependence due to repeated measures. In individual models, all vaccination belief scales were significantly associated with increased COVID-19 vaccine uptake. In a combined model, all belief scales except the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination were significant predictors of vaccine uptake. Overall, belief scales indicating the importance of COVID-19 vaccines and normative beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination were the strongest predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Findings demonstrate that changes in vaccination beliefs influence subsequent COVID-19 vaccine uptake, with implications for the development of future interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccination.

Differences in social media use by COVID-19 vaccination status.

The near-ubiquitous use of social media in the United States (U.S.) highlights the utility of social media for encouraging vaccination. Vaccination campaigns have used social media to reach audiences, yet research linking the use of specific social media platforms and vaccination uptake is nascent. This descriptive study assesses differences in social media use by COVID-19 vaccination status among adults overall and those who reported baseline vaccine hesitancy. We used data from a nationally representative longitudinal survey of U.S. adults administered between January 2021-August 2022 (n = 2,908). Results indicated a positive association between frequent Instagram and/or Twitter use and vaccination status (p <.05). Among baseline vaccine hesitant adults, results indicated a positive association between frequent TikTok, Instagram, and/or Twitter use and vaccination status (p <.05). Findings have implications for research that examines the content of social media platforms and their environment on vaccine attitudes and uptake.

Association Between the "We Can Do This" Campaign and COVID-19 Booster Uptake, U.S., 2021-2022.

Introduction: Monovalent COVID-19 boosters lower the risk of COVID-19 disease, infection, hospitalization, and death. This study examined associations between exposure to a booster public education campaign (the booster campaign) and the increases in booster uptake and reduced length of time until booster uptake among U.S. adults. Methods: Data included a national survey panel of U.S. adults and booster campaign paid media (i.e., digital impressions and TV gross rating points) from September 2021 to May 2022. Multilevel logistic regression models examined the association between exposure to the booster campaign and the likelihood of booster uptake. A Cox proportional hazard model evaluated the association between the booster campaign and booster uptake timing. Interaction terms between the booster campaign media variables and first-dose COVID-19 vaccine date examined differential effects of the booster campaign based on when individuals received their first dose. Results: Interactions between first-dose vaccination date and the booster campaign were statistically significant for cumulative digital impressions (ß=4.75e-08; 95% CIs=5.93e-09, 8.90e-08) and TV gross rating points (ß = 4.62e-05; 95% CIs=5.09e-06, 8.73e-05), suggesting that booster uptake was strongest among those who received their first-dose COVID-19 vaccine later. Booster campaign cumulative digital impressions and TV gross rating points were associated with accelerated booster uptake among those with later first-dose vaccination dates (digital: ß=9.98e-08; 95% CIs=2.70e-08, 1.73e-07; TV: ß=0.0001; 95% CIs=2.80e-05, 0.0002), relative to those with earlier first-dose vaccination dates. Conclusions: The booster campaign may have increased monovalent booster uptake and reduced how long individuals waited until getting their booster. Public education campaigns show promise in stemming the tide of pandemic fatigue and increasing booster confidence.