Factors Influencing the COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Across Diverse Participants Across Patients, Healthcare Providers And Common Public – A Cross Sectional Questionnaire-Based Perception Mapping Survey (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sagar Redkar
Keyword(s):  
Research Work ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Target Population ◽  
Rural Setting ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Scientific Uncertainty ◽  
Time Duration ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Inaccurate Information ◽  
Vaccine Confidence

BACKGROUND Vaccine hesitancy is refusal or reluctance in the acceptance of vaccination despite the availability of vaccination services OBJECTIVE Understanding determinants of vaccine hesitancy for early identification of vaccine concerns to analyse acceptance behaviour in public and in healthcare providers for recommendation behaviour. Target population would be across multiple cities in India, Indonesia, UAE and UK METHODS Questions for survey would be corroborative with existing tools for vaccine hesitancy, based on PICO statement incorporating public health mistrust scale, perceived COVID-19 societal stigma scale - adapted from perceived external stigma of Ebola-related stigma questionnaire, COVID-19-related prosocial behaviors adapted from two scales: empathic responding to SARS scale and pro socialness scale. Time duration from first whatsapp communication, three reminders and execution per targeted individual participant would be for 10 days. Target population include, patients visiting multi-specialty hospital in urban and rural setting in India, physicians in clinical practice across country including corona warriors involved in front-end, university students in medical school, pharmacists in pharmaceutical trade RESULTS We would identify sources of vaccine misinformation, analyse patterns of spread of inaccurate information and help flatten the curve of infodemic. This would enable to define a vaccine confidence index for determining customised educational intervention to support percolation of evidence-based information for COVID-19 vaccine to remove unscientific barriers preventing the uptake and acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine. This would enhance health care provider's confidence in recommending vaccination and thus increasing coverage rates. We plan to submit research work to speciality conferences and plan to conduct workshops to develop educational materials which to mitigate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy CONCLUSIONS We would explore gaps to build scientific trust in era of scientific uncertainty when politicians rather than the medical experts have become the public faces of crisis management CLINICALTRIAL NA

scholarly journals Vaccine hesitancy among healthcare providers during COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Algabbani ◽  
A Algabbani
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Vaccine Safety ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Vaccine Acceptance ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Global Health Issue ◽  
Vaccine Confidence ◽  
And Control

Abstract   Public trust in vaccines is a major global health issue. This study aims to assess the vaccine acceptance among healthcare workers and their confidence and hesitancy of the COVID19 vaccine. This was a multicenter cross-sectional survey conducted among healthcare providers in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia. Data collection was carried out between October and November of 2020 through a web-based survey. COVID19 vaccine hesitancy was assessed using eight structured items adapted from the 5Cs. About 34.6% (95% CI: 27.6%-42.4%) of participants were willing to vaccinate against COVID-19 and 44% (95% CI: 36.5%-51.9%) will recommend the vaccine to their patients. About 45% of participants were neutral regarding vaccine safety and 40% were neutral regarding vaccine effectiveness. Almost 70% believe that the duration of clinical studies of the COVID-19 vaccines affects their confidence in the efficacy and safety of the vaccine. Those who never hesitated or delayed taking any of the recommended vaccination were more likely to be willing to vaccinate COVID-19 (OR 5.46, 95% CI: 2.49-11.98). Assessing the level of vaccine confidence in the population and associated factors will help implement an effective national vaccine program to enhance vaccination uptake and control COVID19 spread during this pandemic. Key messages Vaccine hesitancy is challenging vaccination goals at the national and global level. Hesitancy from the population toward vaccine and concerns regarding its safety and efficacy was observed with the development of a novel vaccine for COVID19 a newly emerged infection.

scholarly journals Healthcare Providers’ Vaccine Perceptions, Hesitancy, and Recommendation to Patients: A Systematic Review

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 713
Author(s):  
Cheryl Lin ◽  
Jewel Mullen ◽  
Danielle Smith ◽  
Michaela Kotarba ◽  
Samantha J. Kaplan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Risk ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Vaccine Safety ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Attitudes And Practices ◽  
Inadequate Knowledge ◽  
Vaccine Confidence ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
Demographic Impact

Despite vaccines’ effectiveness in reducing the rate of preventable diseases, vaccine hesitancy has threatened public health and economies worldwide. Healthcare providers’ (HCP) communications and behavior strongly influence patient receptivity and uptake. The goal of this review was to examine HCP vaccine perceptions, knowledge, and reservations and how these attitudes affect their recommendations and vaccination practices. Primary research studies published by 16 September 2020 were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. A 14-item scale was developed for survey study and risk of bias appraisal (SSRBA). In total, 96 papers from 34 countries were included, covering 17 vaccines (HPV and influenza vaccines the most studied). Recommendation was positively associated with provider knowledge and experience, beliefs about disease risk, and perceptions of vaccine safety, necessity, and efficacy. HCP vaccination attitudes and practices varied across specialties, vaccines, and countries; demographic impact was inconclusive. Barriers included anticipation of patient/parental concerns or refusal, lacking clear guidelines, time constraints, and cost. For HPV, vaccines were more often recommended to older, female adolescents and by physicians who discussed sexual health. HCPs are vital advocates for patients and the public, but studies indicated a prevalence of provider hesitancy pertaining to inadequate knowledge, low vaccine confidence, and suboptimal uptake themselves. Improving HCP knowledge and assuring their access to information they deem trustworthy are essential to supporting HCPs‘ role as “trusted messengers” to promote vaccine acceptance.

scholarly journals Willingness of Black and White Adults to Accept Vaccines in Development: An Exploratory Study Using National Survey Data

2020 ◽  
pp. 089011712097991
Author(s):  
Sandra Crouse Quinn ◽  
Yuki Lama ◽  
Amelia Jamison ◽  
Vicki Freimuth ◽  
Veeraj Shah
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Chronic Health Condition ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Black And White ◽  
Vaccine Type ◽  
Vaccine Confidence

Purpose: Explore acceptability of vaccines in development: cancer, Type II diabetes, Alzheimer’s disease, Lyme disease, Ebola, and obesity. Research questions: To what extent does acceptability vary by vaccine type? To what extent does acceptability of vaccines in development vary by race and other key demographics? To what extent are general vaccine hesitancy and key demographics associated with acceptability of vaccines in development? Design: Cross-sectional online survey administered through GfK’s KnowledgePanel in 2015. Analysis completed in 2020. Subjects: Nationally representative sample of Black and White American adults (n = 1,643). Measures: Willingness to accept a novel vaccine was measured on a 4-point Likert scale. Independent variables included demographics (e.g. age, race, gender) and measures of vaccine hesitancy, trust, and the “Three C’s” of vaccine confidence, complacency, and convenience. Analysis: Exploratory analysis including descriptive statistics and regression modeling. Results: Acceptability varied from 77% for a cancer vaccine to 55% for an obesity vaccine. White race, male gender, older age, having a chronic health condition, and higher socioeconomic status were associated with higher acceptability. Higher vaccine confidence and lower vaccine hesitancy were predictors for acceptability. Conclusion: The success of a vaccine depends on widespread public acceptance. Vaccine hesitancy may hinder acceptance of future vaccines, with significant differences by demographics. Future social science research is necessary to better understand and address vaccine hesitancy.

scholarly journals Adenovirus and RNA-based COVID-19 vaccines’ perceptions and acceptance among healthcare workers in Saudi Arabia: a national survey

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e048586
Author(s):  
Mohamad-Hani Temsah ◽  
Mazin Barry ◽  
Fadi Aljamaan ◽  
Abdullah Alhuzaimi ◽  
Ayman Al-Eyadhy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Validated Questionnaire ◽  
Vectored Vaccine ◽  
To Receive

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the perception, confidence, hesitancy and acceptance rate of various COVID-19 vaccine types among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Saudi Arabia, a nation with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus experience.DesignNational cross-sectional, pilot-validated questionnaire.SettingOnline, self-administered questionnaire among HCWs.ParticipantsA total of 2007 HCWs working in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia participated; 1512 (75.3%) participants completed the survey and were included in the analysis.InterventionData were collected through an online survey sent to HCWs during 1–15 November 2020. The main outcome measure was HCW acceptance of COVID-19 candidate vaccines. The associated factors of vaccination acceptance were identified through a logistic regression analysis and via measurement of the level of anxiety, using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7 scale.ResultsAmong the 1512 HCWs who were included, 62.4% were women, 70.3% were between 21 and 40 years of age, and the majority (62.2%) were from tertiary hospitals. In addition, 59.5% reported knowing about at least one vaccine; 24.4% of the participants were sure about their willingness to receive the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine, and 20.9% were willing to receive the RNA BNT162b2 vaccine. However, 18.3% reported that they would refuse to receive the Ad5-vectored vaccine, and 17.9% would refuse the Gam-COVID-Vac vaccine. Factors that influenced the differential readiness of HCWs included their perceptions of the vaccine’s efficiency in preventing the infection (33%), their personal preferences (29%) and the vaccine’s manufacturing country (28.6%).ConclusionsAwareness by HCWs of the several COVID-19 candidate vaccines could improve their perceptions and acceptance of vaccination. Reliable sources on vaccine efficiency could improve vaccine uptake, so healthcare authorities should use reliable information to decrease vaccine hesitancy among frontline healthcare providers.

scholarly journals The Use of Smart Devices by Care Providers in Emergency Departments: A Cross-Sectional Study (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamad Alameddine ◽  
Hussein Soueidan ◽  
Maha Makki ◽  
Hani Tamim ◽  
Eveline Hitti
Keyword(s):  
Health Center ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Target Population ◽  
Academic Health Center ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Smart Devices ◽  
Smart Device ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Academic Health

BACKGROUND The use of smart devices (SD) by healthcare providers in care settings is a common practice nowadays. Such use is not restricted to applications related to the care of patients but often extends to personal calls and applications with frequent prompts and interruptions. This enhances the risk of distractions caused by SD in the hospital settings and raises concerns on service quality and patient safety. Such concerns are exacerbated in complex care settings like the Emergency Department (ED). OBJECTIVE This study measured the frequency and patterns of SD use among healthcare providers in the ED of a large academic health center in Lebanon. The perceived consequences of care providers on using SDs on the provider-provider communication and the care quality of patients in ED were further assessed. The study further examined the factors associated with the use of smart devices and measured the approval for regulating such use. METHODS The study was carried at the ED of an academic health center in Lebanon. The ED received the highest volume of patient visits in the country. Data was collected using a cross-sectional electronic survey sent to all ED healthcare providers (n=236). The target population included core ED faculty members, attending physicians, residents, medical students, and the nursing care providers. RESULTS Half of the target population responded to the questionnaire. A total of 85.6% of the respondents use one or more medical applications on their smart devices. The respondents believed that using the SD in the ED improved the coordination among the care team (81.6%) and that it was beneficial to patient care (78.9%). In addition, 41.1% of the respondents acknowledged they were distracted when using their SD for non-work purposes. Furthermore, 54.8% of the respondents acknowledged having witnessed their colleagues committed a near miss or an error due to the smart device-caused distractions. Regression analysis revealed that age and missing information due to using the SD are major predictors of committing an error at the ED (p<0.05). Interestingly, more than 40% of the respondents were significantly addicted to using SD and more than third of them felt the need to cut down on such use. CONCLUSIONS The findings of this study make it imperative to safeguard the safety and wellbeing of patients, particularly in high intensity, high volume department such as the ED. Irrespective of the positive role the SD play in the healthcare process, the negative effects of its use mandate proper regulation. This is an ethical mandate taking into consideration the important consequences such use may have on care processes and outcomes.

scholarly journals Emerging public health challenge in UK: perception and belief on increased COVID19 death among BAME healthcare workers

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 486-492 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arumugam Moorthy ◽  
Thangasamy K Sankar
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Work Force ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Target Population ◽  
Front Line ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Co Morbidity ◽  
Adequate Provision

Abstract Background Coronavirus infection Disease 19 impacted every part of the world and routine life. Recent report from the Office of national statistics in UK reported disproportionate death among Black Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) population. NHS is heavily relied on the BAME work force both in front line and in the community. We attempted to explore the beliefs and perception about reported worrying issue among BAME health work force in a Diverse city of Leicester. Methods This is a cross-sectional survey using 20 questions in an electronic format. The target population was identified through Leicester Asian Doctors Society and Leicester Asian Nurses Society. The questionnaire was then distributed electronically to the members. Survey questionnaire was accessed by 372, incomplete response (172) were excluded and 200 completed responses were analysed. Results Majority of BAME workforce are routinely involved in front line duties. More than 70% were anxious about their role during this pandemic. The Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) supply was adequate, and the support received from the local healthcare providers was more than satisfactory. The work force perceived co-morbidity, lack of PPE and testing were one of the few reasons for increased death in BAME. BAME group felt adequate provision of PPE, increased testing and improving mental health well-being is required to alleviate concerns and improve BAME working life in NHS. Conclusion BAME workforce are routinely involved in front line work and current anxiety level is very high. Adequate provision of mental health support with clear risk stratification for return to work is required urgently.

scholarly journals Acceptance and Attitudes Toward COVID-19 Vaccines: A Cross-Sectional Study from Jordan

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamam El-Elimat ◽  
Mahmoud M. AbuAlSamen ◽  
Basima A. Almomani ◽  
Nour A. Al-Sawalha ◽  
Feras Q. Alali
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Public ◽  
Awareness Campaigns ◽  
Health Authorities ◽  
Public Acceptability ◽  
Public Health Authorities

AbstractBackgroundVaccines are effective interventions that can reduce the high burden of diseases globally. However, public vaccine hesitancy is a pressing problem for public health authorities. With the availability of COVID-19 vaccines, little information is available on the public acceptability and attitudes towards the COVID-19 vaccines in Jordan. This study aimed to investigate the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines and its predictors in addition to the attitudes towards these vaccines among public in Jordan.MethodsAn online, cross-sectional, and self-administered questionnaire was instrumentalized to survey adult participants from Jordan on the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines. Logistic regression analysis was used to find the predictors of COVID-19 vaccines’ acceptability.ResultsA total of 3,100 participants completed the survey. The public acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines was fairly low (37.4%) in Jordan. Males (OR=2.488, 95CI%=1.834–3.375, p<.001) and those who took the seasonal influenza vaccine (OR=2.036, 95CI%=1.306–3.174, p=.002) were more likely to accept Covid-19 vaccines. Similarly, participants who believed that vaccines are generally safe (OR=9.258, 95CI%=6.020–14.237, p<.001) and those who were willing to pay for vaccines (OR=19.223, 95CI%=13.665–27.042, p<.001), once available, were more likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccines. However, those above 35 years old (OR=0.376, 95CI%=0.233-0.607, p<.001) and employed participants (OR=0.542, 95CI%=0.405-0.725, p<.001) were less likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccines. Moreover, participants who believed that there was a conspiracy behind COVID-19 (OR=0.502, 95CI%=0.356- 0.709, p<.001) and those who do not trust any source of information on COVID-19 vaccines (OR=0.271, 95CI%=0.183 – 0.400, p<.001), were less likely to have acceptance towards them. The most trusted sources of information on COVID-19 vaccines were healthcare providers.ConclusionSystematic interventions are required by public health authorities to reduce the levels of vaccines’ hesitancy and improve their acceptance. We believe these results and specifically the low rate of acceptability is alarming to Jordanian health authorities and should stir further studies on the root causes and the need of awareness campaigns. These interventions should take the form of reviving the trust in national health authorities and structured awareness campaigns that offer transparent information about the safety and efficacy of the vaccines and the technology that was utilized in their production.

scholarly journals Acceptance and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines: A cross-sectional study from Jordan

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. e0250555
Author(s):  
Tamam El-Elimat ◽  
Mahmoud M. AbuAlSamen ◽  
Basima A. Almomani ◽  
Nour A. Al-Sawalha ◽  
Feras Q. Alali
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Public ◽  
Awareness Campaigns ◽  
Health Authorities ◽  
Public Acceptability ◽  
Public Health Authorities

Vaccines are effective interventions that can reduce the high burden of diseases globally. However, public vaccine hesitancy is a pressing problem for public health authorities. With the availability of COVID-19 vaccines, little information is available on the public acceptability and attitudes towards the COVID-19 vaccines in Jordan. This study aimed to investigate the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines and its predictors in addition to the attitudes towards these vaccines among public in Jordan. An online, cross-sectional, and self-administered questionnaire was instrumentalized to survey adult participants from Jordan on the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines. Logistic regression analysis was used to find the predictors of COVID-19 vaccines’ acceptability. A total of 3,100 participants completed the survey. The public acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines was fairly low (37.4%) in Jordan. Males (OR = 2.488, 95CI% = 1.834–3.375, p < .001) and those who took the seasonal influenza vaccine (OR = 2.036, 95CI% = 1.306–3.174, p = .002) were more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccines. Similarly, participants who believed that vaccines are generally safe (OR = 9.258, 95CI% = 6.020–14.237, p < .001) and those who were willing to pay for vaccines (OR = 19.223, 95CI% = 13.665–27.042, p < .001), once available, were more likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccines. However, those above 35 years old (OR = 0.376, 95CI% = 0.233–0.607, p < .001) and employed participants (OR = 0.542, 95CI% = 0.405–0.725, p < .001) were less likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccines. Moreover, participants who believed that there was a conspiracy behind COVID-19 (OR = 0.502, 95CI% = 0.356–0.709, p < .001) and those who do not trust any source of information on COVID-19 vaccines (OR = 0.271, 95CI% = 0.183–0.400, p < .001), were less likely to have acceptance towards them. The most trusted sources of information on COVID-19 vaccines were healthcare providers. Systematic interventions are required by public health authorities to reduce the levels of vaccines’ hesitancy and improve their acceptance. We believe these results and specifically the low rate of acceptability is alarming to Jordanian health authorities and should stir further studies on the root causes and the need of awareness campaigns. These interventions should take the form of reviving the trust in national health authorities and structured awareness campaigns that offer transparent information about the safety and efficacy of the vaccines and the technology that was utilized in their production.

scholarly journals 1385Hesitancy for Adult Vaccination -A New Paradigm for Research in India

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikhita Kalra ◽  
Tanisha Kalra ◽  
Suruchi Mishra ◽  
Saurav Basu ◽  
Nidhi Bhatnagar
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Health Concern ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Adult Vaccination ◽  
Adult Immunization

Abstract Background Adult immunization has recently emerged as an area of emphasis in research and policy. Increasing life expectancy, outbreaks like COVID-19, and the endemic nature of diseases like dengue, malaria have underscored its importance. Therefore, this study was carried out with the aim to assess hesitancy and factors influencing the uptake of vaccines in adults. Methods An online cross-sectional study was conducted among adults (age more than 20 years). Data collection was done by convenience sampling in January 2021. Information on awareness and perceptions regarding adult vaccination and immunization status of participants was collected. Data analysis was done using SPSS version 21. Results A total of 461 adults responded to the survey. Among those who had never received any vaccine in adulthood (n = 158), the reasons were lack of recommendation by healthcare providers (38.6%), lack of knowledge of vaccines (15.8%) and fear of adverse effects following vaccination (7.6%). Hesitancy for vaccines among those who were informed by healthcare workers was as follows: shingles (97.8%), human papillomavirus (92.1%), pneumococcal (91.1%), influenza (79.7%), varicella (79.4%) and tetanus (57.6%). Conclusions Reduced vaccine uptake due to vaccine hesitancy in adulthood is a major health concern. Hesitancy was highest for the shingles vaccine and least for the tetanus vaccine. Key messages Coverage of adult vaccination can be improved by formulating national guidelines and encouraging healthcare providers to raise awareness. In-depth qualitative studies are needed to understand the perception of adults towards vaccination.

scholarly journals Factors influencing likelihood of COVID-19 vaccination: A survey of Tennessee adults

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin Gatwood ◽  
Madison McKnight ◽  
Michelle Fiscus ◽  
Kenneth C Hohmeier ◽  
Marie Chisholm-Burns
Keyword(s):  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Seasonal Influenza ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Final Article ◽  
Survey Responses

Abstract Disclaimer In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. Purpose To examine the vaccine-related beliefs and behaviors associated with likely hesitancy toward vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among nonelderly adults. Methods A cross-sectional survey was conducted in June 2020. Responses were sought from Tennessee adults 18 to 64 years of age who were not healthcare providers. The survey instrument focused on vaccine-related beliefs, prior and planned influenza and pneumococcal vaccine use, and attitudes toward receiving a COVID-19 vaccination. Inferential statistics assessed survey responses, and logistic regression determined predictors of the likelihood of COVID-19 vaccination. Results A total of 1,000 completed responses were analyzed (a 62.9% response rate), and respondents were mostly White (80.1%), insured (79.6%), and/or actively working (64.2%); the sample was well balanced by gender, age, income, and political leaning. Approximately one-third (34.4%) of respondents indicated some historical vaccine hesitancy, and only 21.4% indicated always getting a seasonal influenza vaccination. More than half (54.1%) indicated at least some hesitancy toward vaccination against COVID-19, with 32.1% citing lack of evidence of vaccine effectiveness as the leading reason. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was more likely among those with more moderate (odds ratio [OR], 2.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.749-3.607) or conservative (OR, 3.01; 95% CI, 2.048-4.421) political leanings, Black Americans (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.182-2.742), and residents of nonmetropolitan areas (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.386-2.865). Conclusion Subgroups of the population may prove more challenging to vaccinate against COVID-19, requiring targeted approaches to addressing hesitancy to ensure more-vulnerable populations are adequately covered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document