scholarly journals The social experience of participation in a COVID-19 vaccine trial: Subjects’ motivations, others’ concerns, and insights for vaccine promotion

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Wentzell ◽  
Ana-Monica Racila
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Lived Experiences ◽  
Vaccine Development ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Vaccine Trial ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Vaccine Promotion

AbstractBackgroundVaccine hesitancy could undermine the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination programs. Knowledge about people’s lived experiences regarding COVID-19 vaccination can enhance vaccine promotion and increase uptake.AimTo use COVID-19 vaccine trial participants’ experiences to identify key themes in the lived experience of vaccination early in the vaccine approval and distribution process.MethodsWe interviewed 31 participants in the Iowa City, Iowa US site of the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine phase 3 clinical trial. While trial participation differs from clinical receipt of an approved vaccine in key ways, it offers the first view of people’s lived experiences of potentially receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. The trial context is also useful since decision-making about vaccination and medical research participation often involve similar hopes and concerns, and because the public appears to view even approved COVID-19 vaccines as experimental given their novelty. Semi-structured interviews addressed subjects’ experiences, including decision-making and telling others about their trial participation. We analyzed verbatim transcripts of these interviews thematically and identified common themes relevant for vaccination decision-making.ResultsParticipants across demographic groups, including age, sex/gender, race/ethnicity, and political affiliation, described largely similar experiences. Key motivations for participation included ending the pandemic/restoring normalcy, protecting oneself and others, doing one’s duty, promoting/modeling vaccination, and expressing aspects of identity like being a helper, career-related motivations, and support of science/vaccines. Participants often felt uniquely qualified to help via trial participation due to personal attributes like health, sex/gender or race/ethnicity. They reported hearing concerns about side effects and the speed and politicization of vaccine development. Participants responded by normalizing and contextualizing side effects, de-politicizing vaccine development, and explaining how the rapid development process was nevertheless safe.ConclusionThese findings regarding participants’ reported motivations for trial participation and interactions with concerned others can be incorporated into COVID-19 vaccine promotion messaging aimed at similar populations.

scholarly journals Faster than warp speed: early attention to COVD-19 by anti-vaccine groups on Facebook

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seth C Kalichman ◽  
Lisa A Eaton ◽  
Valerie A Earnshaw ◽  
Natalie Brousseau
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Vaccine Development ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Vaccine Safety ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Government ◽  
Vaccine Information

Abstract Background The unprecedented rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines has faced SARS-CoV- (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy, which is partially fueled by the misinformation and conspiracy theories propagated by anti-vaccine groups on social media. Research is needed to better understand the early COVID-19 anti-vaccine activities on social media. Methods This study chronicles the social media posts concerning COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines by leading anti-vaccine groups (Dr Tenpenny on Vaccines, the National Vaccine Information Center [NVIC] the Vaccination Information Network [VINE]) and Vaccine Machine in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (February–May 2020). Results Analysis of 2060 Facebook posts showed that anti-vaccine groups were discussing COVID-19 in the first week of February 2020 and were specifically discussing COVID-19 vaccines by mid-February 2020. COVID-19 posts by NVIC were more widely disseminated and showed greater influence than non-COVID-19 posts. Early COVID-19 posts concerned mistrust of vaccine safety and conspiracy theories. Conclusion Major anti-vaccine groups were sowing seeds of doubt on Facebook weeks before the US government launched its vaccine development program ‘Operation Warp Speed’. Early anti-vaccine misinformation campaigns outpaced public health messaging and hampered the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines.

scholarly journals COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in a Representative Education Sector Population in Qatar

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 665
Author(s):  
Reem Al-Mulla ◽  
Marawan Abu-Madi ◽  
Qusai M. Talafha ◽  
Reema F. Tayyem ◽  
Atiyeh M. Abdallah
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Vaccine Development ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccine Virus ◽  
International Travel ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Health Campaigns ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Vaccination Programs

Even though vaccination programs have now started in earnest across the globe and in Qatar, vaccine hesitancy remains a barrier to effectively tackling the pandemic. Many factors influence willingness to take vaccines including safety, efficacy, and side effects. Given their proximity to research and education, university students and employees represent an interesting cohort in which to investigate vaccine hesitancy. The aim of this study was to assess the attitudes of Qatar University employees and students towards the COVID-19 vaccine. In total, 231 employees and 231 students participated in an online cross-sectional study in February 2021. Of the sample, 62.6% were willing to take a vaccine against COVID-19. Participants with or taking postgraduate degrees were more willing to take the vaccine compared to participants with or taking a diploma or bachelor’s degree (p < 0.001). Males had a higher rate of vaccine acceptance (p < 0.001). In the group that regarded flu vaccination as important, 13% were unwilling to take COVID-19 vaccine. There were no associations between willingness to vaccinate and vaccine/virus knowledge and social media use. Participants showed a high level of concern regarding vaccine side effects in themselves or their children. Two-thirds agreed or strongly agreed that they would take the vaccine if it was mandatory for international travel. Our participants were neutral to the origin of vaccine development. These findings, which represent data collected after the start of the national vaccination program, show that vaccine hesitancy persists in the Qatari population and that some groups, such as undergraduate students, could benefit from specific, targeted public health campaigns.

scholarly journals COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among medical students

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria C Lucia ◽  
Arati Kelekar ◽  
Nelia M Afonso
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Vaccine Trial ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Positive Attitudes ◽  
Fda Approval ◽  
Vaccine Recommendations ◽  
Coverage Rates

ABSTRACT Background Medical students are among the group of frontline healthcare providers likely to be exposed to COVID-19 patients. It is important to achieve high COVID-19 vaccination coverage rates in this group as soon as a vaccine is available. As future healthcare providers, they will be entrusted with providing vaccine recommendations and counseling vaccine-hesitant patients. Methods This project used self-report to assess vaccine hesitancy and acceptance among medical students towards the novel COVID-19 vaccine. Results Nearly all participants had positive attitudes towards vaccines and agreed they would likely be exposed to COVID-19; however, only 53% indicated they would participate in a COVID-19 vaccine trial and 23% were unwilling to take a COVID-19 vaccine immediately upon FDA approval. Students willing to immediately take the vaccine were more likely to trust public health experts, have fewer concerns about side effects and agree with vaccine mandates (P &lt; 0.05). Concern for serious side effects was independently predictive of lower odds of intent to participate in a COVID-19 vaccine trial (AOR = 0.41, P = 0.01). Conclusion This is the first study to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among US medical students and highlights the need for an educational curriculum about the safety and effectiveness to promote uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine.

scholarly journals A behavioral economics perspective on the COVID-19 vaccine amid public mistrust

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Londeree Saleska ◽  
Kristen R Choi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Behavioral Economics ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Vaccine Development ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Public Health Professionals ◽  
Human Decision ◽  
Vaccine Decision Making ◽  
To Receive

Abstract The COVID-19 vaccine development, testing, and approval processes have moved forward with unprecedented speed in 2020. Although several vaccine candidates have shown promising results in clinical trials, resulting in expedited approval for public use from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, recent polls suggest that Americans strongly distrust the vaccine and its approval process. This mistrust stems from both the unusual speed of vaccine development and reports about side effects. This article applies insights from behavioral economics to consider how the general public may make decisions around whether or not to receive a future COVID-19 vaccine in a context of frequent side effects and preexisting mistrust. Three common cognitive biases shown to influence human decision-making under a behavioral economics framework are considered: confirmation bias, negativity bias, and optimism bias. Applying a behavioral economics framework to COVID-19 vaccine decision-making can elucidate potential barriers to vaccine uptake and points of intervention for clinicians and public health professionals.

scholarly journals Factors Affecting Attitudes towards COVID-19 Vaccination: An Online Survey in Slovenia

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 247
Author(s):  
Luka Petravić ◽  
Rok Arh ◽  
Tina Gabrovec ◽  
Lucija Jazbec ◽  
Nika Rupčić ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Slovenian Population ◽  
Personal Experiences ◽  
Open Question

While the problem of vaccine hesitancy is not new, it has become more pronounced with the new COVID-19 vaccines and represents an obstacle to resolving the crisis. Even people who would usually trust vaccines and experts now prefer to wait for more information. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in Slovenia in December 2020 to find out the attitudes of the population regarding COVID-19 vaccination and the factors that affect these attitudes. Based on 12,042 fully completed questionnaires, we find that higher intention to get vaccinated is associated with men, older respondents, physicians and medical students, respondents who got the influenza vaccination, those who knew someone who had gotten hospitalised or died from COVID-19 and those who have more trust in experts, institutions and vaccines. Nurses and technicians were less likely to get vaccinated. In answers to an open question, sceptics were split into those doubting the quality due to the rapid development of the vaccine and those that reported personal experiences with side effects of prior vaccinations. Although the Slovenian population is diverse in its attitudes towards vaccination, the results are comparable to those found in other countries. However, there are potential limitations to the generalizability of the findings that should be addressed in future studies.

scholarly journals Covid-19 vaccination: The pros and cons

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 015-022
Author(s):  
Odangowei Inetiminebi Ogidi ◽  
Wonyinbarakemi Ladi Berefagha ◽  
Ebifanimi Okara
Keyword(s):  
Vaccine Development ◽  
Research Effort ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Herd Immunity ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Herd Protection ◽  
Rapid Spread ◽  
Travel Restrictions ◽  
Pros And Cons ◽  
Global Coordination

The advent of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) also known as COVID-19 disease and the dynamics of its rapid spread around the globe are unprecedented. Different preventive efforts have been undertaken in response to this global health challenge, amongst them, vaccine development, distribution and dispensation is at the forefront. Vaccines stimulate the body’s immune system against infectious pathogens; hence, they are one of the greatest medical accomplishments and a cornerstone of public health. There is a strong consensus globally that COVID-19 vaccine is likely the most effective approach to sustainably controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. An unprecedented research effort and global coordination has resulted in a rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines. Here, we review the various types, Pros (status of different COVID-19 vaccines, their utility in COVID-19 control and as a tool of herd immunity or protection) and Cons (various side effects, leaky vaccination and vaccine hesitancy) of COVID-19 vaccines. Despite all cons it is believed that vaccination will certainly help in building up of herd protection against COVID-19 disease, which could allow lockdowns, travel restrictions and social distancing to be relaxed globally.

scholarly journals Can shared decision making address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy?

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjebm-2021-111695
Author(s):  
Marie-Anne Durand ◽  
Peter Scalia ◽  
Glyn Elwyn
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Shared Decision

scholarly journals Intention to Be Vaccinated for COVID-19 among Italian Nurses during the Pandemic

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 500
Author(s):  
Marco Trabucco Aurilio ◽  
Francesco Saverio Mennini ◽  
Simone Gazzillo ◽  
Laura Massini ◽  
Matteo Bolcato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Vaccine Efficacy ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Vaccine Development ◽  
Vaccine Coverage ◽  
World Health ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Effective Vaccine ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Female Sex

Background: While the COVID-19 pandemic has spread globally, health systems are overwhelmed by both direct and indirect mortality from other treatable conditions. COVID-19 vaccination was crucial to preventing and eliminating the disease, so vaccine development for COVID-19 was fast-tracked worldwide. Despite the fact that vaccination is commonly recognized as the most effective approach, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), vaccine hesitancy is a global health issue. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of nurses in four different regions in Italy between 20 and 28 December 2020 to obtain data on the acceptance of the upcoming COVID-19 vaccination in order to plan specific interventions to increase the rate of vaccine coverage. Results: A total of 531 out of the 5000 nurses invited completed the online questionnaire. Most of the nurses enrolled in the study (73.4%) were female. Among the nurses, 91.5% intended to accept vaccination, whereas 2.3% were opposed and 6.2% were undecided. Female sex and confidence in vaccine efficacy represent the main predictors of vaccine intention among the study population using a logistic regression model, while other factors including vaccine safety concerns (side effects) were non-significant. Conclusions: Despite the availability of a safe and effective vaccine, intention to be vaccinated was suboptimal among nurses in our sample. We also found a significant number of people undecided as to whether to accept the vaccine. Contrary to expectations, concerns about the safety of the vaccine were not found to affect the acceptance rate; nurses’ perception of vaccine efficacy and female sex were the main influencing factors on attitudes toward vaccination in our sample. Since the success of the COVID-19 immunization plan depends on the uptake rate, these findings are of great interest for public health policies. Interventions aimed at increasing employee awareness of vaccination efficacy should be promoted among nurses in order to increase the number of vaccinated people.

scholarly journals High likelihood of accepting COVID-19 vaccine in a Latinx community at high SARS-CoV2 risk in San Francisco

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Peng ◽  
Carina Marquez ◽  
Luis Rubio ◽  
Gabriel Chamie ◽  
Diane Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Test Site ◽  
Healthcare Systems ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
High Likelihood

Abstract Of 4,133 persons surveyed at a low-barrier COVID-19 test site with high positivity in an urban Latinx community in January 2021, 86% indicated they would accept a COVID-19 vaccination. Top reasons for vaccine hesitancy included concerns around side effects and safety and distrust of healthcare systems.

Abstract TP409: Reporting of Key Demographic Characteristics in Neurological Trials Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov

Stroke ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kush Fansiwala ◽  
Lauren Southwick ◽  
Emily Goldmann ◽  
Nina S Parikh ◽  
Joy Madubuonwu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Neurological Diseases ◽  
Demographic Characteristics ◽  
Mandatory Reporting ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Limited Participation ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Race Ethnicity

Introduction: To increase the transparency of clinical trial information, U.S. Congress passed the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Amendments Act of 2007, which expanded prior legislation to mandate inclusion of specific trial characteristics, such as funding source and gender demographics, in a new basic results section on ClinicalTrials.gov. Few studies have examined the extent to which key demographic characteristics such as sex and race/ethnicity are reported for neurological trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. Methods: As part of the National Initiative for Minority Involvement in Neurological Clinical Trials (NIMICT), we systematically identified neurological clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov (for stroke, epilepsy, Alzheimer’s Disease [AD]) and examined the proportion that reported sex, race, and ethnicity (Hispanic/Latino or not) of study participants. We used the website’s advanced search feature to evaluate demographic information reported from trials conducted between 1999 and 2015. We first calculated frequencies of trials reporting these characteristics, then assessed differences in reporting of each characteristic (yes/no) by condition (stroke, epilepsy, AD) and between trials conducted before and after the basic results section update (pre- and post-2008) using chi-square tests. Results: Our sample comprised 251,847 subjects across 393 trials (147 stroke, 127 epilepsy, 115 AD). Overall, sex was reported for nearly all trials (99.0%), while reporting of race and ethnicity was low (ethnicity: 14.0%, race: 19.8%). Reporting of these characteristics did not differ significantly across the three conditions or between periods preceding and following the FDA act. Conclusion: While ClinicalTrials.gov mandates reporting of sex, it does not require reporting of race/ethnicity, and few trials report these characteristics. This lack of information prevents understanding of neurological trial participation and how interventions might impact patients differently by race/ethnicity. Mandatory reporting of race/ethnicity would enhance transparency and increase awareness of the limited participation of racial/ethnic minorities-who suffer disproportionately from neurological diseases-in neurological trials.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document