Revisiting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy around the world using data from 23 countries in 2021

Nature Communications, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 13(1)

Published: July 1, 2022

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact daily life, including health system operations, despite the availability of vaccines that are effective in greatly reducing risks death and severe disease. Misperceptions vaccine safety, efficacy, risks, mistrust institutions responsible for vaccination campaigns have been reported as factors contributing hesitancy. This study investigated hesitancy globally June 2021. Nationally representative samples 1,000 individuals from 23 countries were surveyed. Data analyzed descriptively, weighted multivariable logistic regressions used explore associations with Here, we show more than three-fourths (75.2%) 23,000 respondents report acceptance, up 71.5% one year earlier. Across all countries, is associated a lack trust safety science, skepticism about its efficacy. Vaccine hesitant also highly resistant required proof vaccination; 31.7%, 20%, 15%, 14.8% approve requiring it access international travel, indoor activities, employment, public schools, respectively. For ongoing succeed improving coverage going forward, substantial challenges remain be overcome. These include increasing among those reporting lower confidence addition expanding low- middle-income countries.

Language: Английский

---

The Vaccine-Hesitant Moment

New England Journal of Medicine, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 387(1), P. 58 - 65

Published: June 29, 2022

Language: Английский

---

Efficacy and Safety of a Recombinant Plant-Based Adjuvanted Covid-19 Vaccine

New England Journal of Medicine, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 386(22), P. 2084 - 2096

Published: May 4, 2022

Coronavirus-like particles (CoVLP) that are produced in plants and display the prefusion spike glycoprotein of original strain severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) combined with an adjuvant (Adjuvant System 03 [AS03]) to form candidate vaccine.In this phase 3, multinational, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 85 centers, we assigned adults (≥18 years age) a 1:1 ratio receive two intramuscular injections CoVLP+AS03 vaccine or placebo 21 days apart. The primary objective was determine efficacy preventing symptomatic disease 2019 (Covid-19) beginning least 7 after second injection, analysis performed detection 160 cases.A total 24,141 volunteers participated trial; median age participants 29 years. Covid-19 confirmed by polymerase-chain-reaction assay 165 intention-to-treat population; all viral samples could be sequenced contained variants strain. Vaccine 69.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 56.7 78.8) against any caused five were identified sequencing. In post hoc analysis, 78.8% CI, 55.8 90.8) moderate-to-severe 74.0% 62.1 82.5) among who seronegative baseline. No cases occurred group, which load for breakthrough lower than group factor more 100. Solicited adverse events mostly mild moderate transient frequent group; local 92.3% 45.5% participants, respectively, systemic 87.3% 65.0%. incidence unsolicited similar groups up each dose (22.7% 20.4%) from day 43 through 201 (4.2% 4.0%).The effective spectrum variants, ranging infection disease. (Funded Medicago; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04636697.).

Language: Английский

---

A Scoping Review to Find Out Worldwide COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Its Underlying Determinants

Vaccines, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: 9(11), P. 1243 - 1243

Published: Oct. 25, 2021

The current crisis created by the coronavirus pandemic is impacting all facets of life. Coronavirus vaccines have been developed to prevent infection and fight pandemic. Since might be only way stop spread coronavirus. World Health Organization (WHO) has already approved several vaccines, many countries started vaccinating people. Misperceptions about persist despite evidence vaccine safety efficacy.To explore scientific literature find determinants for worldwide COVID-19 hesitancy as reported in literature.PRISMA Extension Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines were followed conduct a scoping review on willingness vaccinate. Several databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar) searched relevant articles. Intervention- (i.e., vaccine) outcome- hesitancy) related terms used search these databases. was conducted 22 February 2021. Both forward backward reference lists checked further studies. Three reviewers worked independently select articles extract data from selected literature. Studies that quantitative survey measure acceptance included this review. extracted synthesized following narrative approach results represented graphically with appropriate figures tables.82 studies 882 identified our search. Sometimes, had performed same country, it observed high earlier decreased over time hope efficacy. People different varying percentages uptake (28-86.1%), (10-57.8%), refusal (0-24%). most common affecting vaccination intention include efficacy, side effects, mistrust healthcare, religious beliefs, trust information sources. Additionally, intentions are influenced demographic factors such age, gender, education, region.The underlying complex context-specific, across socio-demographic variables. Vaccine can also other health inequalities, socioeconomic disadvantages, systemic racism, level exposure misinformation online, some being more dominant certain than others. Therefore, strategies tailored cultures socio-psychological need reduce aid informed decision-making.

Language: Английский

---

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance among Low- and Lower-Middle-Income Countries: A Rapid Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Vaccines, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 10(3), P. 427 - 427

Published: March 11, 2022

Widespread vaccination against COVID-19 is critical for controlling the pandemic. Despite development of safe and efficacious vaccinations, low-and lower-middle income countries (LMICs) continue to encounter barriers care owing inequitable access vaccine apprehension. This study aimed summarize available data on acceptance rates factors associated with in LMICs. A comprehensive search was performed PubMed, Scopus, Web Science from inception through August 2021. Quality assessments included studies were carried out using eight-item Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool cross-sectional studies. We a meta-analysis estimate pooled 95% confidence intervals (CI). total 36 met inclusion criteria review. 83,867 respondents 33 studied. Most conducted India (n = 9), Egypt 6), Bangladesh 4), or Nigeria 4). The pooled-effect size rate 58.5% (95% CI: 46.9, 69.7, I2 100%, studies) hesitancy 38.2% 27.2–49.7, 32 studies). In country-specific sub-group analyses, showed highest acceptancy (76.7%, 65.8–84.9%, I2= 98%), while lowest (42.6%, 16.6–73.5%, 98%). Being male perceiving risk infection predictors willingness accept vaccine. Increasing global south should be prioritized advance coverage.

Language: Английский

---

Multilevel determinants of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in the United States: A rapid systematic review

Preventive Medicine Reports, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: 25, P. 101673 - 101673

Published: Dec. 16, 2021

Vaccine hesitancy is a challenge for the success and optimal implementation of COVID-19 immunization programs in US. The objective this study was to summarize multilevel determinants vaccination intention US inform future intervention opportunities. To end, we conducted rapid systematic review by searching published articles via PubMed October 5, 2021, following PRISMA guidelines. One hundred six were included. According nationally representative studies, overall acceptance rate ranges from 53.6% 84.4%. Individual (demographics, health history, behaviors beliefs), interpersonal (having close friend/family member impacted COVID-19), healthcare societal level factors (healthcare provider recommendations, source/credential related information, conspiracy theories) all contributed vaccine This demonstrates that vaccines influenced various factors, particularly role providers enhancing public intent vaccination. Potential interventions mitigate people's concerns over address vaccine-related conspiracy/misinformation social media are also critical encourage uptake

Language: Английский

---

Addressing vaccine hesitancy and resistance for COVID-19 vaccines

International Journal of Nursing Studies, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 131, P. 104241 - 104241

Published: April 1, 2022

Language: Английский

---

Vaccine Hesitancy: Obstacles and Challenges

Current Pediatrics Reports, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 10(4), P. 241 - 248

Published: Oct. 8, 2022

Language: Английский

---

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 12(8), P. e061477 - e061477

Published: Aug. 1, 2022

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis estimate the vaccines' acceptance level find factors influencing pregnant women's vaccination decisions, with goal assisting in development interventions promoting more research area.

Language: Английский

---

A systematic review of communication interventions for countering vaccine misinformation

Vaccine, Journal Year: 2023, Volume and Issue: 41(5), P. 1018 - 1034

Published: Jan. 1, 2023

Misinformation and disinformation around vaccines has grown in recent years, exacerbated during the Covid-19 pandemic. Effective strategies for countering vaccine misinformation are crucial tackling hesitancy. We conducted a systematic review to identify describe communications-based used prevent ameliorate effect of mis- dis-information on people's attitudes behaviours surrounding vaccination (objective 1) examined their effectiveness 2). searched CINAHL, Web Science, Scopus, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo MedRxiv March 2021. The search strategy was built three themes(1) communications media; (2) misinformation; (3) vaccines. For trials addressing objective 2, risk bias assessed using Cochrane randomized tool (RoB2). Of 2000 identified records, 34 eligible studies addressed 1, 29 which also 2 (25 RCTs 4 before-and-after studies). Nine 'intervention approaches' were identified; most focused content intervention or message (debunking/correctional, informational, use disease images other 'scare tactics', humour, intensity, inclusion warnings, communicating weight evidence), while two delivery (timing source). Some strategies, such as scare tactics, appear be ineffective may increase endorsement. Communicating with certainty, rather than acknowledging uncertainty efficacy risks, found backfire. Promising approaches include weight-of-evidence scientific consensus related myths, humour incorporating warnings about encountering misinformation. Trying debunk misinformation, informational approaches, had mixed results. This identifies some promising communication Interventions should further evaluated by measuring effects uptake, distal outcomes knowledge attitudes, quasi-experimental real-life contexts.

Language: Английский

---