scholarly journals Trusted Sources of COVID-19 Vaccine Information among Hesitant Adopters in the United States

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 1418
Author(s):  
Rachel S. Purvis ◽  
Emily Hallgren ◽  
Ramey A. Moore ◽  
Don E. Willis ◽  
Spencer Hall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Information Sources ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
World Health ◽  
Health Concern ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Vaccine Information

The World Health Organization has identified vaccine hesitancy as a top health concern. Emerging research shows that those who are hesitant may still get vaccinated; however, little is known about those who say they are hesitant but still get vaccinated. Most people have high trust in several sources of COVID-19 information, and trust in certain information sources such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and health care providers was associated with being vaccinated. This study explored trusted information sources among hesitant adopters in the United States with a survey respondents completed while waiting after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine dose. The study included (n = 867) respondents. The majority of respondents were female (60.21%); were between the ages of 18 and 44 years old (71.97%); and were diverse, with most identifying as White (44.54%) or Hispanic/Latinx (32.55%). Hesitant adopters reported multiple trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information, which can be grouped into four emergent subthemes: (1) Health care/Medical science, (2) Personal relationships, (3) News and social media, and (4) Individual/Myself. Some respondents expressed a distrust of all sources of COVID-19 vaccine information, despite receiving the vaccine, describing a lack of trust in traditional sources of information such as the mainstream media or government. This study contributes to the literature by documenting trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information among hesitant adopters in the United States. Findings provide important insights about respondents’ trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information that can inform future public health messaging campaigns intended to increase vaccine uptake among hesitant adopters.

scholarly journals Antivaccine Messages on Facebook: Preliminary Audit

10.2196/18878 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. e18878
Author(s):  
Dhamanpreet Dhaliwal ◽  
Cynthia Mannion
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Health ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Government ◽  
Health Organization

Background The World Health Organization lists vaccine hesitancy as one of 10 threats to global health. The antivaccine movement uses Facebook to promote messages on the alleged dangers and consequences of vaccinating, leading to a reluctance to immunize against preventable communicable diseases. Objective We would like to know more about the messages these websites are sharing via social media that can influence readers and consumers. What messages is the public receiving on Facebook about immunization? What content (news articles, testimonials, videos, scientific studies) is being promoted? Methods We proposed using a social media audit tool and 3 categorical lists to capture information on websites and posts, respectively. The keywords “vaccine,” “vaccine truth,” and “anti-vax” were entered in the Facebook search bar. A Facebook page was examined if it had between 2500 and 150,000 likes. Data about beliefs, calls to action, and testimonials were recorded from posts and listed under the categories Myths, Truths, and Consequences. Website data were entered in a social media audit template. Results Users’ posts reflected fear and vaccine hesitancy resulting from the alleged dangers of immunization featured on the website links. Vaccines were blamed for afflictions such as autism, cancer, and infertility. Mothers shared testimonies on alleged consequences their children suffered due to immunization, which have influenced other parents to not vaccinate their children. Users denied the current measles outbreaks in the United States to be true, retaliating against the government in protests for fabricating news. Conclusions Some Facebook messages encourage prevailing myths about the safety and consequences of vaccines and likely contribute to parents’ vaccine hesitancy. Deeply concerning is the mistrust social media has the potential to cast upon the relationship between health care providers and the public. A grasp of common misconceptions can help support health care provider practice.

scholarly journals Antivaccine Messages on Facebook: Preliminary Audit (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dhamanpreet Dhaliwal ◽  
Cynthia Mannion
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Health ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Government ◽  
Health Organization

BACKGROUND The World Health Organization lists vaccine hesitancy as one of 10 threats to global health. The antivaccine movement uses Facebook to promote messages on the alleged dangers and consequences of vaccinating, leading to a reluctance to immunize against preventable communicable diseases. OBJECTIVE We would like to know more about the messages these websites are sharing via social media that can influence readers and consumers. What messages is the public receiving on Facebook about immunization? What content (news articles, testimonials, videos, scientific studies) is being promoted? METHODS We proposed using a social media audit tool and 3 categorical lists to capture information on websites and posts, respectively. The keywords “vaccine,” “vaccine truth,” and “anti-vax” were entered in the Facebook search bar. A Facebook page was examined if it had between 2500 and 150,000 likes. Data about beliefs, calls to action, and testimonials were recorded from posts and listed under the categories Myths, Truths, and Consequences. Website data were entered in a social media audit template. RESULTS Users’ posts reflected fear and vaccine hesitancy resulting from the alleged dangers of immunization featured on the website links. Vaccines were blamed for afflictions such as autism, cancer, and infertility. Mothers shared testimonies on alleged consequences their children suffered due to immunization, which have influenced other parents to not vaccinate their children. Users denied the current measles outbreaks in the United States to be true, retaliating against the government in protests for fabricating news. CONCLUSIONS Some Facebook messages encourage prevailing myths about the safety and consequences of vaccines and likely contribute to parents’ vaccine hesitancy. Deeply concerning is the mistrust social media has the potential to cast upon the relationship between health care providers and the public. A grasp of common misconceptions can help support health care provider practice.

The Special Perils of Being Old and Sick in Prison

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 276-284
Author(s):  
William J. Jefferson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Medical Practitioners ◽  
Medical Needs ◽  
Access To Medical Care

The United States Supreme Court declared in 1976 that deliberate indifference to the serious medical needs of prisoners constitutes the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain…proscribed by the Eighth Amendment. It matters not whether the indifference is manifested by prison doctors in their response to the prisoner’s needs or by prison guards intentionally denying or delaying access to medical care or intentionally interfering with treatment once prescribed—adequate prisoner medical care is required by the United States Constitution. My incarceration for four years at the Oakdale Satellite Prison Camp, a chronic health care level camp, gives me the perspective to challenge the generally promoted claim of the Bureau of Federal Prisons that it provides decent medical care by competent and caring medical practitioners to chronically unhealthy elderly prisoners. The same observation, to a slightly lesser extent, could be made with respect to deficiencies in the delivery of health care to prisoners of all ages, as it is all significantly deficient in access, competencies, courtesies and treatments extended by prison health care providers at every level of care, without regard to age. However, the frailer the prisoner, the more dangerous these health care deficiencies are to his health and, therefore, I believe, warrant separate attention. This paper uses first-hand experiences of elderly prisoners to dismantle the tale that prisoner healthcare meets constitutional standards.

Patients' Perceptions of Different Information Exchange Mechanisms: An Exploratory Study in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (04/05) ◽  
pp. 162-178
Author(s):  
Pouyan Esmaeilzadeh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
The United States ◽  
Exchange Mechanism ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Security Risks ◽  
Direct Exchange

Abstract Background Patients may seek health care services from various providers during treatment. These providers could serve in a network (affiliated) or practice separately (unaffiliated). Thus, using secure and reliable health information exchange (HIE) mechanisms would be critical to transfer sensitive personal health information (PHI) across distances. Studying patients' perceptions and opinions about exchange mechanisms could help health care providers build more complete HIEs' databases and develop robust privacy policies, consent processes, and patient education programs. Objectives Due to the exploratory nature of this study, we aim to shed more light on public perspectives (benefits, concerns, and risks) associated with the four data exchange practices in the health care sector. Methods In this study, we compared public perceptions and expectations regarding four common types of exchange mechanisms used in the United States (i.e., traditional, direct, query-based, patient-mediated exchange mechanisms). Traditional is an exchange through fax, paper mailing, or phone calls, direct is a provider-to-provider exchange, query-based is sharing patient data with a central repository, and patient-mediated is an exchange mechanism in which patients can access data and monitor sharing. Data were collected from 1,624 subjects using an online survey to examine the benefits, risks, and concerns associated with the four exchange mechanisms from patients' perspectives. Results Findings indicate that several concerns and risks such as privacy concerns, security risks, trust issues, and psychological risks are raised. Besides, multiple benefits such as access to complete information, communication improvement, timely and convenient information sharing, cost-saving, and medical error reduction are highlighted by respondents. Through consideration of all risks and benefits associated with the four exchange mechanisms, the direct HIE mechanism was selected by respondents as the most preferred mechanism of information exchange among providers. More than half of the respondents (56.18%) stated that overall they favored direct exchange over the other mechanisms. 42.70% of respondents expected to be more likely to share their PHI with health care providers who implemented and utilized a direct exchange mechanism. 43.26% of respondents believed that they would support health care providers to leverage a direct HIE mechanism for sharing their PHI with other providers. The results exhibit that individuals expect greater benefits and fewer adverse effects from direct HIE among health care providers. Overall, the general public sentiment is more in favor of direct data transfer. Our results highlight that greater public trust in exchange mechanisms is required, and information privacy and security risks must be addressed before the widespread implementation of such mechanisms. Conclusion This exploratory study's findings could be interesting for health care providers and HIE policymakers to analyze how consumers perceive the current exchange mechanisms, what concerns should be addressed, and how the exchange mechanisms could be modified to meet consumers' needs.

Pediatric Collections: Vaping: Effects and Solutions

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Pediatric Health ◽  
Pediatric Health Care

Electronic cigarettes are the tobacco products most commonly used by youths in the United States. The use of e-cigarettes, also known as vaping or JUULing, is a public health epidemic. This collection offers reviews and research to assist pediatric health care providers in identifying and treating adolescent use and exposure to e-cigarettes. https://shop.aap.org/pediatric-collections-vaping-effects-and-solutions-paperback/

Fraud and Abuse: United States ex rel Merena v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.; United States ex rel Spear v. SmithKline Beecham Clinical Lab.; United States ex rel Grossenbacher v. SmithKline Beecham Clinical Lab.

2000 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allyson Behm
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Laboratory Tests ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Individual Analysis ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Government

The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that when quitam relators file a multi-claim complaint under the Fraudulent Claims Act (FCA), their share of the proceeds must be based on an individual analysis of each claim. More importantly, the court held that relators are not entitled to any portion of the settlement of a specific claim if that claim was subject to dismissal under section 3730(e)(4) Relator Merena filed a quitam suit against his employer, SmithKline Beecham (SKB), claiming, among other things, that SKB defrauded the government by billing for laboratory tests that were not performed, paying illegal kickbacks to health care providers, and participating in an “automated chemistry” scheme. Soon thereafter, additional relators filed suit.

Disparities in Pediatric Oncology: The 21st Century Opportunity to Improve Outcomes for Children and Adolescents With Cancer

2021 ◽  
pp. e315-e326
Author(s):  
Paula Aristizabal ◽  
Lena E. Winestone ◽  
Puja Umaretiya ◽  
Kira Bona
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Low Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Pediatric Cancer ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cancer Disparities ◽  
Care Providers

Adult cancer disparities have been documented for decades and continue to persist despite clinical advancements in cancer prevention, detection, and treatment. Pediatric cancer survival has improved significantly in the United States for the past 5 decades to over 80%; however, disparate outcomes among children and adolescents with cancer still affect many populations in the United States and globally, including racial and ethnic minorities, populations with low socioeconomic status, and residents of underserved areas. To achieve equitable outcomes for all children and adolescents with cancer, it is imperative that concerted multilevel approaches be carried out to understand and address health disparities and to ensure access to high-quality cancer care. Addressing social determinants of health, such as removing barriers to health care access and ensuring access to social supports, can reduce pediatric cancer disparities. Nevertheless, public health policy, health system interventions, and innovative delivery of evidence-based services are critically needed. Partnerships among patients, caregivers, and health care providers, and among health care, academic, and governmental institutions, have a pivotal role in reducing cancer disparities and improving outcomes in the 21st century.

Psychological, Social and Technical Factors Influencing Electronic Medical Records Systems Adoption by U.S. Physicians: A Systematic Model

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raghid El-Yafouri ◽  
Leslie Klieb ◽  
Valérie Sabatier
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Electronic Medical Records ◽  
Medical Records ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Financial Burden ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Intention To Adopt

Abstract Background: Wide adoption of electronic medical records (EMR) systems in the United States can lead to better quality medical care at a lower cost. Despite the laws and financial subsidies by the U.S. government for service providers and suppliers, the adoption has been slow. Understanding the EMR adoption drivers for physicians and the role of policymaking can translate into increased adoption rate and enhanced information sharing between medical care providers. Methods: Physicians across the United States were surveyed to gather primary data on their psychological, social, and technical perceptions toward EMR systems. This quantitative study builds on the Theory of Planned Behavior, the Technology Acceptance Model, and the Diffusion of Innovation theory to propose, test, and validate an innovation adoption model for the health care industry. 382 responses were collected and data were analyzed via linear regression to uncover the effects of 12 variables on the intention to adopt EMR systems.Results: Regression model testing uncovers that government policymaking or mandates and other social factors have little or negligible effect on physicians’ intention to adopt an innovation. Rather, physicians are directly driven by their attitudes and ability to control, and indirectly motivated by their knowledge of the innovation, the financial ability to acquire the system, the holistic benefits to their industry, and the relative advancement of the system compared to others.Conclusions: A unidirectional mandate from the government is not sufficient for physicians to adopt an innovation. Government, health care associations, and EMR system vendors can benefit from our findings by working toward increasing the physicians’ knowledge of the proposed innovation, socializing how medical care providers and the overall industry can benefit from EMR system adoption, and solving for the financial burden of system implementation and sustainment.

Hispanics, Mental Health, and Suicide: Brief Report

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 133-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Brenes
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Hispanic Americans ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
The United States ◽  
Health Concern ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Provider Attitudes ◽  
Health Crisis

A global health crisis exists surrounding suicide. In the United States, suicide rates have increased by nearly 30% in most states since 1999. Although the suicide rate among Hispanic Americans is significantly lower than non-Hispanic Whites, reasons for the lower rate are unclear. Current literature suggests that the lower rate may be due to underreporting, a lack of suicide screening and a number of complex social issues, including the stigma surrounding suicide in Hispanic culture. Health care provider attitudes toward suicidal individuals may also negatively affect mental health outcomes. This brief report focuses on suicide as a public health concern, addresses key issues arising from the phenomenon, and provides a perspective on health care providers’ attitudes toward suicide. Recommendations for future research, as well as implications for clinical practice and policy, are suggested.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document