Vaccine Hesitancy Research Articles

Bridging the gap: Political engagement and trust as mediators of racial health inequities and vaccine reluctance

This paper investigates how political engagement and trust can reduce health disparities in the context of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. It posits that active participation in the political process and trust in political institutions enable communities, especially marginalized ones, to advocate for equitable health policies, leading to more inclusive healthcare services. The study employs a multidisciplinary approach to understand how politics influence individual and collective health behaviors and decision-making. The research uses t-tests and logistic regression to analyze the relationship between political factors (like interest and participation) and trust in political and federal systems on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The t-test examines disparities in vaccine hesitancy across racial groups, revealing significant differences and emphasizing the impact of race on health behaviors. Logistic regression, controlling for variables such as partisanship and media influence, further explores these relationships, showing a consistent negative correlation between trust in federal institutions and vaccine hesitancy across racial groups. The study also finds that this correlation varies by race, with trust in the political system and political participation influencing vaccine hesitancy to different degrees among racial groups. These findings underscore the complex interplay between political engagement, trust, and health behaviors, highlighting the role of politics in shaping public health outcomes.

Cognitive flexibility predicts attitudes towards vaccination: evidence from a New Zealand sample

BackgroundVaccine hesitancy (the reluctance or refusal to vaccinate) poses a significant threat to public health worldwide, with declining vaccination coverage resulting in the resurgence of vaccine-preventable diseases (e.g., measles) in recent years. Despite efforts to combat vaccine hesitancy through information-based campaigns and other interventions, vaccine-hesitant attitudes persist. Given that such interventions likely expose individuals to information that conflicts with their own viewpoints about vaccination, cognitive flexibility – the ability to adapt one’s thoughts, attitudes, beliefs, or behavior in response to changing information or environmental demands – may play a role in vaccine hesitancy.MethodsThe current study investigated the relationship between cognitive flexibility and attitudes towards vaccination in a sample of New Zealand residents (N = 601). Cognitive flexibility was measured using perseverative responses in the Wisconsin Card-Sorting Task, and vaccination attitudes were measured using an adapted version of the Multidimensional Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (MVHS). Linear regression was used with MVHS scores as the dependent variable and cognitive flexibility and sociodemographic variables (age, gender, ethnicity, education level, religion) as predictors.ResultsCognitive flexibility predicted personal barriers to vaccination (e.g.,” vaccines go against my personal beliefs”), with participants with lower levels of cognitive flexibility reporting greater personal barriers. In contrast, there was no significant relationship between cognitive flexibility and external barriers to vaccination (e.g., “vaccines cost too much”). Additionally, religious participants reported overall higher levels of vaccine hesitancy than non-religious participants.ConclusionsThese findings join others demonstrating that individual differences in cognitive style are associated with attitudes towards vaccination, and tentatively suggest that interventions aiming to reduce vaccine hesitancy may be more effective if combined with techniques to increase cognitive flexibility. To be sure, future work is needed to test the causal relationship between cognitive flexibility and attitudes towards vaccination.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake among populations in the West department of Haiti.

The COVID-19 pandemic in Haiti led to increased challenges for a population concurrently dealing with natural and social disasters, poor quality health care, lack of clean running water, and inadequate housing. In 2022, the population of Haiti was 11.4 million. While half a million vaccines for COVID-19 were donated by the United States to the government of Haiti, less than 5% of the population agreed to be vaccinated. This resulted in thousands of unused doses that were diverted to other countries. The purpose of this study was to evaluate population characteristics related to vaccine uptake in order to inform future interventions to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake as well as inform strategies to safeguard against future global health security threats. This was a mixed-methods, cross-sectional study conducted in the West Department of Haiti within peri-urban communes. Participants consisted of adults in this setting responding to a survey from June 15 to July 18, 2022. The survey assessed demographic information, household characteristics, religious beliefs, past vaccine use, and current COVID-19 vaccine status. Multivariate regression modeling was conducted to assess predictors of vaccine hesitancy. Qualitative focus group discussion participants were recruited and focus group discussions were conducted between August-September 2022 among community groups, religious leaders and health professionals to provide additional, community-level context on perceptions of the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines. A total of 1,923 respondents completed the survey; of which a majority were male (52.7%), between the age of 18-35 (58.5%), had a medical visit within the last year (63.0%) and received the COVID-19 vaccine (46.1%). Compared to those who had been COVID-19 vaccinated, participants who had not been vaccinated were more likely to be male (57.7% vs 46.8%, p < .0001), have completed secondary education (30.5% vs 16.6%, p < .001), unemployed (20.3% vs 7.3%, p < .0001) and had a medical visit 3 or more years ago (30.2% vs 11.2%, p < .0001). Unvaccinated COVID-19 participants were also more likely to have never received any other vaccine (36.1% vs22.5%, p < .0001), have a religious leader speak out against the vaccine (20.0% vs 13.1%, p < .0001), not believe in the effectiveness of the vaccine (51.2% vs 9.1%, p < .0001) and did not trust the healthcare worker administering the vaccine (35.2% vs 3.8%, p<0.0001). These results show that targeted interventions to religious leaders and health care workers on how to engage with the community and share clearer messages around the COVID-19 vaccination may result in increased vaccine uptake. Results also shed light on how activities surrounding vaccinations can be tailored to meet client needs addressing the misinformation encountered to achieve greater health impact thereby safeguarding the population against future global health security threats.

To vaccinate or not to vaccinate? Experiences of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people living with non-communicable diseases in Ghana: A qualitative study.

Following the development of a vaccine for COVID-19, the expectation was instantaneous widespread distribution and uptake to halt further spread, severe illness and deaths from the virus. However, studies show very low uptake, especially in resource-poor settings, and little is documented about the drivers of vaccine uptake in populations classified as high-risk. In this study, we explored access and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among people living with non-communicable diseases (PLWNCDs) in Ghana. A qualitative study using in-depth interviews and focus group discussions was conducted among adults (>18 years) PLWNCDs stratified by sex, age, and type of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) at the community level (non-users of the health service) and health facility levels. Purposive sampling was used to select eligible participants. Topic guides were used to facilitate the face-to-face in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. The interviews and discussions were all digitally audio recorded. All transcripts and field notes were thematically analysed. Overall, 62 participants were recruited for this study. Family members, friends/peers, health workers and media were identified as the main sources of information for COVID-19 vaccines. Several barriers that mediated access to the COVID-19 vaccines in Ghana were reported including mistrust of vaccine efficacy and fears of vaccine side-effects, long distance to and waiting hours at vaccination centres, shortages of vaccines at vaccination centres and non-prioritization of NCD patients for the vaccine. To improve uptake, intensified education and sensitization, house-to-house vaccination, expansion of vaccination centers and increased supply of vaccines were recommended by participants. Compared to studies elsewhere, misinformation and disinformation were not major causes of vaccine hesitancy. If policymakers can improve community-based vaccine delivery, reduce queues and waiting times, prioritize PLWNCDs and other vulnerable groups, and improve sensitization and communication-our findings suggest there will be major improvements in COVID-19 vaccine coverage in Ghana.

VACCINATION HESITATION FROM THE BIOETHICAL PERSPECTIVE

Introduction: Vaccine hesitation represents a significant challenge to public health, with serious consequences, such as the resurgence of eradicated diseases, the return of measles and pertussis in Brazil, as well as other immunoprevenable diseases, due to the fall in vaccination coverage. There is a bioethical conflict between the autonomy of parents who choose not to vaccinate their children and the lack of responsibility, as citizens, to protect public health. In addition, the responsibility of health professionals to work in accordance with the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, so that they always indicate and encourage vaccines duly endorsed by science. Respect for autonomy should be balanced with the collective good, where vaccination hesitation contributes to the resurgence of preventable diseases and generates negative impacts on public health. Objective: Discuss vaccine hesitation from the perspective of bioethics from a real case report, addressing the repercussions of doctors’ instructions to their patients. Additionally, the legal aspects related to the obligation of vaccination in Brazil are discussed, with emphasis on collective protection and ethical duty to promote public health. METHOD: This is a descriptive and qualitative study based on a real case report of meningoencephalitis resulting from chickenpox, whose searches were performed in the Scielo, PubMed and Lilacs databases. Discussion: Varicella is a disease caused by the varicella-zoster virus, whose transmission occurs through respiratory aerosols or contact with the contents of skin lesions. Its main complications are meningoencephalitis, pneumonia, skin and ear infections. Meningoencephalitis is a rare interlocutory appeal that consists of acute central nervous system inflammation and can be fatal. Vaccination against chickenpox prevents injuries resulting from this infection. According to the legislation in force in the country, the obligation to immunize through a vaccine that, registered with a health surveillance body, is part of the National Immunization Program or its obligatory application determined by law is constitutional. Addressing the precepts of principalist bioethics, the present study relates them to the reported case, aiming to broadly discuss vaccine hesitation from medical advice. CONCLUSION: The case report highlights the importance of vaccination against the varicella zoster virus in preventing serious complications and the bioethical dilemma between parents’ autonomy and the responsibility of protecting the health of children and the community. Non -immunization, as in the case of the varicella, highlights the need to prioritize the principles of beneficence and non -maleficence. Although autonomy is essential, it should be balanced with the individual and collective good, especially in vaccination, where protection depends on adherence to immunization policies. Vaccine hesitation is a growing public health problem, requiring health professionals to be well formed to combat misinformation and promote evidence -based practices.

The association of vaccine hesitancy with other public health practices in well child care: a cross-sectional study

Vaccination is one of the most successful public health initiatives in human history. Despite all the benefits of vaccination, it is noteworthy that the number of vaccine hesitant parents has increased in recent years. Individuals with vaccine hesitancy are known to have similar attitudes towards other scientific initiatives. In this study, we investigated the relationship between the attitudes of vaccine hesitant parents and other practices and interventions in well child care. The “Parental Attitudes Towards Childhood Vaccinations (PACV) scale was applied to parents of children aged 2-6 without chronic diseases. A PACV score of 50 or above was considered as vaccine hesitancy. Sociodemographic characteristics, economic status and practices in well child care were questioned. Parents' vaccine hesitancy and their approaches to other practices in well child follow-up were compared. A total of 329 parents were included in the study. The rate of parents with vaccine hesitancy was 22.8% (n=75). In both groups, most participants had an undergraduate/graduate level of education. Those with vaccine hesitancy were less likely to have received vitamin K at birth (81.3% vs. 97.6%, p&lt;0.01), and use of prophylactic vitamin D (72% vs. 88.2%, p&lt;0.01) and iron supplements in the first year of life (66.7% vs 78.3%, p=0.038) were lower. No difference was found for developmental hip dysplasia and hearing screening. The current attitudes of vaccine hesitant parents are not limited to vaccination, but also affect other health initiatives. In our study, we have shown that vaccine hesitant individuals are also opposed and/or reluctant to child health initiatives. Taking this into account when developing strategies to overcome vaccine hesitancy may lead to more effective results.

Message framing's limited efficacy in counteracting parental hesitancy towards human papillomavirus vaccination for female adolescents: Insights from a randomized trial.

Parental acceptance of HPV vaccination remains low. This study investigates the influence of different message framing on Chinese parental intentions to vaccinate their daughters against HPV. A 2 (appeal framing: gain vs. loss) × 2 (cultural value: individualism vs. collectivism) × 2 (evidence type: narrative vs. non-narrative) factorial design was used in an online experiment. Parents of unvaccinated junior high school girls were recruited and included in the experiment. The primary outcome assessed was the reduction in HPV vaccine hesitancy (VH). The analysis of variance tests (ANOVAs) and hierarchical regression analyses were conducted to test the hypotheses. Of 4012 participants, the majority were women with low VH. Only loss-framing exerted a direct effect on advocacy (p = .036). Initial VH negatively moderated this effect (p = .027). Except for narrative evidence (p = .068), message framings showed significant small effects in low-hesitant participants (p = .032). An incentive policy negatively moderated the initial VH's effect on advocacy (p = .042). Persuasion was evident only among low-hesitant participants not receiving incentives (p = .002). In contrast, for highly hesitant individuals without incentive policies, loss-framing (p = .024) and collectivism perspective (p = .033) produced counterintuitive effects. Message framing is effective among low-hesitant parents of female adolescents in improving HPV vaccination decisions without economic incentives. Non-narrative evidence and loss-framing messages should be prioritized over narrative evidence and gain-framing messages. Nonetheless, caution is warranted when engaging with highly hesitant parents.

Assessing changes in COVID-19 vaccine uptake and intentions among the Brigada Digital Latino social media audience: a repeated cross-sectional study

BackgroundU.S. Latinos experienced disproportionate COVID-19 impacts in terms of morbidity and mortality. Vaccination against COVID-19 is an important strategy for mitigating health impacts, and yet, vaccine uptake was slower among U.S. Latino adults compared to other racial/ethnic groups. Vaccine hesitancy has been a significant barrier within Latino communities, and exposure to misinformation has been associated with negative attitudes toward vaccination. While some COVID-19 mitigation efforts have included community-based outreach, few studies have explored the impact of community-based digital messaging in Spanish to counter COVID-19 misinformation, build trust, and promote vaccination. To address this gap, we conducted a one-year repeated cross-sectional study to assess changes in COVID-19 vaccine uptake, intentions, and perceived norms, as well as barriers to accessing reliable information and levels of trust in COVID-19 information sources among Latino adults exposed to Brigada Digital de Salud social media content. This culturally-tailored content disseminated on Facebook, Instagram, and X platforms was amplified by community health workers and partners, and focused on COVID-19 risk and prevention, vaccine safety and efficacy, and correcting related misinformation.ResultsStatistically significant increases in COVID-19 vaccination and intentions to vaccinate children were observed from May 2022 (wave 1) to April 2023 (wave 2). Among perceived difficulties accessing information, respondents indicated the most difficulty in judging the reliability of COVID-19 information in the media; however, a statistically significant decrease in perceived difficulty was observed between waves. With regard to trust in COVID-19 information sources, levels of trust were highest for healthcare providers in both waves, and there were statistically significant increases in trust in the FDA to ensure COVID-19 vaccine safety and trust in the federal government to ensure child COVID-19 vaccine safety at wave 2.ConclusionsSocial media messaging by trusted community-based sources shows promise as a strategy for combating health misinformation and ameliorating information access gaps for language minority populations. This digital approach represents an important tool for deploying critical information to underserved populations in public health emergency and crisis contexts, and for supporting changes in attitudes, trust, and behaviors to improve health outcomes.

Vaccine hesitancy and the challenge of successful scientific communication

Vaccine hesitancy and the challenge of successful scientific communication Drawing on personal experiences and public discourse, Dr. Klaus Eyer, an Associate Professor at Aarhus University, explores the challenges of communicating about vaccine science to address vaccine hesitancy. Various hurdles need to be overcome by a vaccine to protect against a disease. It needs to be proven safe and effective in clinical studies. It also needs to be widely accepted and used by the public. This article examines the difficulties of communicating about vaccine science based on personal experiences and public discussions. My background is rooted in continental Europe, and my perspective may differ from those with other cultural or personal backgrounds. I have been actively involved in public outreach to promote vaccination, driven by my conviction in scientific evidence that shows current vaccines offer a net benefit to both individuals and communities, despite the challenges they present in terms of safety and efficacy in very rare cases, as I discussed in the previous article for this publication.(1) To offer a broader view, I’ve included insights from colleagues gathered through discussions in recent years, but we will still only be able to scratch the surface.

Impact of Vaccination and the Anti-Vaccine Movement on Health in Brazil recorded in 2018.

Impact of Vaccination and the Anti-Vaccine Movement on Health in Brazil recorded in 2018.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Uptake among Firefighters: An Application of the Health Belief Model.

To assess COVID-19 vaccination prevalence and explore whether health beliefs were associated with vaccination among firefighters. A cross-sectional online survey was distributed to Minnesota firefighters in March - April 2022. Survey questions included demographics, vaccination status, and beliefs about COVID-19 and vaccines. Of the survey respondents (N = 974, 91% male, 89% White), 76% were fully vaccinated and 53% were boosted. Firefighters were less likely to be vaccinated if they reported more perceived barriers (OR = 0.42, p < .001), greater decision-making ease (OR = 0.42, p < .001), and greater autonomy (OR = 0.65, p = .04). Greater perceived benefits (OR = 2.63, p < .001) and social norms (OR = 2.10, p < .001) were associated with a greater likelihood of being vaccinated. Similar results were seen predicting booster status. Firefighters had similar vaccination rates as the general population, despite high exposure risks. Health beliefs are strongly related to vaccination status.

Prevalence and factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adults in Ghana: a population-based cross-sectional study in the Volta Region

BackgroundVaccines have been instrumental in preventing up to three million deaths globally, according to the WHO. Despite this, COVID-19 vaccine uptake has faced challenges due to vaccine issues, production difficulties, and various socio-demographic, economic, structural, and cultural factors.Objective/aimThis study examined the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy among adults aged 18 and older in the Volta Region of Ghana.MethodsA population-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 590 adults from three districts using multistage sampling. Respondents aged 18 years and above were recruited using a structured questionnaire and an interviewer-administered approach. Data analysis was conducted using STATA version 16. The relationship between the dependent and independent variables was assessed through logistic regression analysis, with statistical significance determined at a p-value of less than 0.05.ResultsA 42.5% rate of vaccine hesitancy was found. Key predictors included being an artisan (aOR = 1.99), a trader (aOR = 3.64), lacking nearby healthcare centres (aOR = 1.52), residing in rural areas (aOR = 0.41), earning less than 500 cedis (aOR = 0.57), and having a larger household size (aOR = 0.37). Not receiving information on vaccine side effects from health personnel (aOR = 5.6) was also a significant factor (p < 0.05).ConclusionTo enhance COVID-19 vaccine uptake and advance towards ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all at all ages (SDG 3), healthcare interventions designed by health professionals should address these major predictors.

COVID-19 Vaccination Rates and Vaccine Hesitancy in Pregnant Women in Seven Low- and Middle-Income Countries Through May 2023: An Observational Study From the Global Network.

COVID-19 Vaccination Rates and Vaccine Hesitancy in Pregnant Women in Seven Low- and Middle-Income Countries Through May 2023: An Observational Study From the Global Network.

Pandemic perspectives from detained youth during COVID-19: Bridging the knowledge gap for future safeguards.

Despite the worsening health disparities among youth in detention during the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been minimal exploration into the pandemic experiences of detained youth and opportunities for pandemic mitigation. This paper analyzes the perspectives of youth in detention on the pandemic, including the effect of the pandemic on their detention experience and their perceptions about COVID-19 vaccination. The study used purposive sampling to recruit 16 participants (aged 14-17 years) from two juvenile detention centers in the urban Midwest. We conducted semi-structured interviews and analyzed verbatim transcripts using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach and thematic analysis. Four themes emerged: 1) personal experience influenced youth perceptions of pandemic severity and risk; 2) distrust and misconceptions contributed to youth vaccine hesitancy or refusal; 3) desired opportunities and parental opinion motivated youth to get the COVID-19 vaccine; and 4) pandemic mitigation strategies negatively impacted youths' detention center experience. Study findings identify opportunities for detention centers to minimize the negative impacts of pandemic mitigation strategies on youth in detention, expand vaccination knowledge and uptake, and build trust to positively impact the health and wellbeing of detained youth currently and during future pandemics.

Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among adolescents and youths aged 10-35 years in sub-Saharan African countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The COVID-19 pandemic has overwhelmed health systems, especially in sub-Saharan African countries. Vaccination is one of the easily accessible interventions that can help reduce the burden on the health system. However, vaccination coverage remains low in sub-Saharan African countries. The determinants of vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among adolescents and youths remain unknown. Therefore, this study explored the pooled prevalence and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among adolescents and youths in sub-Saharan African Countries. A systematic literature search of Scopus, PubMed Central, PubMed, Embase, African Journal Online, Research 4 Life, Embase, and Google Scholar was performed from 6th May to 31st December 2023, using developed keywords with a focus on sub-Saharan African countries. Twenty-three (N = 23) studies were finally selected for analysis. The pooled prevalence of vaccine acceptance among adolescents and youths was 38.7% (n = 23). The subgroup analysis of the pooled prevalence of acceptance among adolescents was 36.1% (n = 36.1) while youths were 42% (n = 10). At the region level, West Africa had 42.2% (n = 13), East Africa had 39.8% (n = 6), Central Africa had 33% (n = 1), and Southern Africa had 24.2% (n = 3). The determinants of vaccine acceptance were the desire for self-immunity (AOR = 1.97, 95%, CI, 1.083.47, I2 = 94.15%, p < 0.05), receiving Health Officers' information (AOR = 4.36, 95%, CI, 2.28-8.32, I2 = 97.74, p < 0.001), the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine (AOR = 2.14, 95%, CI, 1.14-4.05, I2 = 97.4%, p < 0.05). The odds of having an unconfirmed source of information (AOR = 0.22, 95% CI, 0.10-0.45, I2 = 94.09%, p< 0.001) was responsible for vaccine hesitancy. The findings indicate the low pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and high levels of hesitancy among adolescents and youths in sub-Saharan African countries. Therefore, there is a need to ensure that extensive research is undertaken into age-appropriate health promotion messages and strategies to encourage the uptake of vaccines. PROSPERO ID number CRD42023403071.

Vaccination hesitancy: agreement between WHO and ChatGPT-4.0 or Gemini Advanced.

An increasing number of individuals use online Artificial Intelligence (AI) - based chatbots to retrieve information on health-related topics. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy in answering vaccine-related answers of the currently most commonly used, advanced chatbots - ChatGPT-4.0 and Google Gemini Advanced. We compared the answers provided by the World Health Organization (WHO) to 38 open questions on vaccination myths and misconception, with the answers created by ChatGPT-4.0 and Gemini Advanced. Responses were considered as "appropriate", if the information provided was coherent and not in contrast to current WHO recommendations or to drug regulatory indications. The rate of agreement between WHO answers and Chat-GPT-4.0 or Gemini Advanced was very high, as both provided 36 (94.7%) appropriate responses. The few discrepancies between WHO and AI-chatbots answers could not be considered "harmful", and both chatbots often invited the user to check reliable sources, such as CDC or the WHO websites, or to contact a local healthcare professional. In their current versions, both AI-chatbots may already be powerful instrument to support the traditional communication tools in primary prevention, with the potential to improve health literacy, medication adherence, and vaccine hesitancy and concerns. Given the rapid evolution of AI-based systems, further studies are strongly needed to monitor their accuracy and reliability over time.

An exploration of teacher and school-based nurse perceptions of current HPV education offered to students 15-16 years old in post-primary schools in Northern Ireland, UK.

Human papillomavirus virus (HPV) is highest among young adults 15-24 years old. High-risk strains are responsible for the development of cancers including cervical, vaginal, vulvar, anal, oropharyngeal and penile. Despite HPV school-based vaccination programmes in the UK, HPV vaccination uptake rates continue to fluctuate due to misinformation and vaccine hesitancy post COVID-19. The aim of this study is to explore perceptions of post-primary school teachers and nurses regarding the current HPV education provision and the need to provide HPV education to students 15-17 years old when they are most likely to be becoming sexually active. A qualitative study was conducted using online semi-structured interviews between February-August 2022 with post-primary teachers and nurses in Northern Ireland, UK. Stratified random sampling was used to contact schools to recruit participants. Recruitment continued until data saturation was reached. Braun & Clarke's six-phase framework for reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Twelve teachers and six nurses participated in the study. Four themes arose based on the analysis including 1) the importance of HPV education 2) self-consent to the HPV vaccine 3) design of the HPV education and 4) delivery of the HPV education. Identified barriers to implementation of HPV education included lack of parental education, religion and the conservative culture of Northern Ireland. Participants perceived HPV education to be poor or non-existent in their schools but placed high importance on this education. They indicated that a non-judgemental health professional would be the ideal person to deliver interactive HPV education as part of a mandated spiral curriculum. HPV education at 15-17 years old provides students with an opportunity to learn about their HPV risk, their HPV vaccination status and an opportunity to self-consent to the HPV vaccine. The Education Authority and Department of Health should support health professionals to deliver consistent robust HPV health information to students of this age.

Do social media epistemological beliefs and health perception impact parents' vaccine hesitancy? A mediation analysis.

In recent years, there has been a notable increase in vaccine hesitancy among individuals. It is crucial to identify the factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy to effectively address this issue. This study aims to investigate the impact of social media-specific epistemological beliefs on vaccine hesitancy and the mediating role of health perception in this impact. This study is a cross-sectional study conducted with 444 parents. Data were collected using the Personal Information Form, the Social Media-Specific Epistemological Beliefs Scale, the Perception of Health Scale, and the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale. When there is no mediator variable, the total effect of social media-specific epistemological beliefs on vaccine hesitancy is statistically significant (β = -0.219, p < 0.001). However, it was found that health perception did not mediate the relationship between social media-specific epistemological beliefs and vaccine hesitancy (β = 0.0038, 95% confidence interval (-0.0090, 0.0205)). Furthermore, it was determined that social media-specific epistemological beliefs positively predicted health perception (β = 0.136, p < 0.01). Health perception was found to have no significant effect on vaccine hesitancy (β = 0.028, p > 0.05). It can be concluded that social media-specific epistemological beliefs negatively predict vaccine hesitancy, and this effect is independent of health perception. Primary healthcare professionals should consider incorporating interventions aimed at enhancing individuals' social media-specific epistemological beliefs into their health education programs related to vaccines.

Factors Associated with Parents' COVID-19 Vaccination Decisions for Their Children in an Economically Marginalized, Diverse Community.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is a significant public health concern, particularly among parents who serve as gatekeepers for their child(ren)'s vaccination status. This study adds to the literature by examining COVID-19 vaccine decisions among parents living in a mid-size, lower-income, racially/ethnically diverse, community. Parents of children, < 18 years and enrolled in the public schools system, were invited to complete a questionnaire offered in English, Spanish, and Portuguese. The questionnaire included questions about their child(ren)'s vaccination status, as well as factors which, based on the literature, might impact parents' vaccination decisions. Parents (n = 277) were mostly Hispanic/Latinx, females, with a high school degree/GED as their highest level of education achieved, a mean age of 40 years, and an average of two children < 18 years. Four-fifths (78.6%) of parents reported being vaccinated against COVID-19, but only 40.8% reported having all of their children vaccinated; 14.8% had some of their children get the COVID-19 vaccine, and 44.4% had none of their children get the COVID-19 vaccine. In bivariate associations, parents' vaccination status, parents age, the CDC website as a COVID-19 information source, awareness of age eligibility for the COVID-19 vaccine, parents reporting knowing someone who does not want to vaccinate their child, and parents' perceived social norm score were associated with children's vaccination status. However, when multivariate analyses were conducted, only parents' age and perceived social norms increased parents' odds of choosing to vaccinate their child. These findings have implications for those promoting COVID-19 vaccination among parents in lower-income, diverse communities.

Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy: A Comparison of Sociodemographic and Socioeconomic Predictors with Health Literacy Dimensions.

Vaccine hesitancy represents a global public health challenge that can diminish the effectiveness of vaccination programs. Research indicates that various sociodemographic and socioeconomic factors, along with health literacy, predict vaccine hesitancy. In this study, we analyzed data from a Slovenian health literacy survey that included 3360 adult participants. We examined the effects of sociodemographic (gender and age) and socioeconomic factors (education, economic deprivation, and self-assessed socioeconomic status), as well as different dimensions of health literacy (general, communicative, and navigational), on vaccine hesitancy. The results show that age, education, and economic deprivation are statistically significant predictors of vaccine hesitancy; younger individuals, those with lower education levels, and those experiencing greater economic deprivation express increased vaccine hesitancy. Higher levels of general and communicative health literacy are associated with lower vaccine hesitancy, while navigational health literacy was not found to be a statistically significant predictor of vaccine hesitancy.