Browsing by Subject "Vaccine uptake"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    COVID-19 vaccine uptake among healthcare workers in the fourth country to authorize BNT162b2 during the first month of rollout
    (Elsevier, 2021-09) Barry, Mazin; Temsah, Mohamad-Hani; Aljamaan, Fadi; Saddik, Basema; Al-Eyadhy, Ayman; Alenezi, Shuliweeh; Alamro, Nurah; Alhuzaimi, Abdullah N; Alhaboob, Ali; Alhasan, Khalid; Alsohime, Fahad; Alaraj, Ali; Halwani, Rabih; Jamal, Amr; Temsah, Omar; Alzamil, Fahad; Somily, Ali; Al-Tawfiq, Jaffar A.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) was the fourth country in the world to authorize the BNT162b2 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, which it rolled out on December 17, 2020 and first targeted at healthcare workers (HCWs). This study assesses vaccine uptake among this group during the first month of its availability. Methods A national cross-sectional, pilot-validated, self-administered survey was conducted among HCWs in the KSA between December 27, 2020 and January 3, 2021. The survey included sociodemographic details, previous contact with COVID-19 patients, previous infection with COVID-19, receiving (or registering with the Ministry of Health website to receive) the COVID-19 vaccine, sources of HCWs’ information on vaccines, awareness of emerging variants of concern, and anxiety level using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder assessment. A descriptive bivariate analysis and multivariate logistic binary regression analysis were performed. The primary evaluated outcome was vaccine uptake. Results Of the 1058 participants who completed the survey, 704 (66.5%) were female, and 626 (59.2%) were nurses. Of all the respondents, 352 (33.27%) were enrolled to receive or had already received the vaccine, while 706 (66.73%) had not enrolled. In a bivariate analysis, not enrolling for vaccination was more likely in females than males (78.5% vs. 21.5%, P < 0.001), HCWs between the ages of 20 and 40 years than those >40 years (70.4% vs. 29.6%, P = 0.005), Saudi HCWs than expatriates (78% vs 22%, P < 0.001), and among HCWs who used social media as a source of information than those who did not (69.8% vs. 38.6%, P < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, independent factors associated with uptake were being a Saudi national (aOR = 1.918, 95 %CI = 1.363–2.698, P < 0.001), working in an intensive care unit (aOR = 1.495, 95 %CI = 1.083–2.063, P = 0.014), and working at a university hospital (aOR = 1.867, 95 %CI = 1.380–2.525, P < 0.001). Conclusions A low level of vaccine uptake was observed especially in female HCWs, those younger than 40 years old, and those who used social media as their source of vaccine information. This survey provides important information for public health authorities in order to scale up vaccination campaigns targeting these HCWs to increase vaccine enrollment and uptake.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Factors that differentiate COVID-19 vaccine intentions among Indiana parents: Implications for targeted vaccine promotion
    (Elsevier, 2022) Head, Katharine J.; Zimet, Gregory D.; Yiannoutsos, Constantin T.; Silverman, Ross D.; Sanner, Lindsey; Menachemi, Nir; Communication Studies, School of Liberal Arts
    Given low rates of uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine for children 12-17 and 5-11 years old, research is needed to understand parental behaviors and behavioral intentions related to COVID-19 vaccination for their children. In the state of Indiana, we conducted a non-random, online survey of parents or caregivers (N = 10,266) about their COVID-19 vaccine intentions or behaviors, demographic characteristics, and potential motivating reasons for getting the vaccine. In terms of behaviors/intentions, 44.8% of participants indicated they were vaccine acceptors (i.e., had already had their children vaccinated or would as soon as it was possible), 13.0% indicated they were vaccine hesitators (i.e., wanted to wait and see), and 42.2% indicated they were vaccine rejecters (i.e., would not vaccinate or only would if mandated). Compared to vaccine rejecters, vaccine hesitators were more likely to be motivated by perceptions of vaccine safety and efficacy, normative influences such as close friends/family who had been vaccinated and a recommendation from a provider, as well as if they were vaccinated themselves. These findings have implications for the development of targeted vaccine promotion strategies, such as social norms messaging and a focus on vaccine safety, in order to increase COVID-19 vaccination for eligible children.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Types of HPV Vaccine Misinformation Circulating on Twitter (X) That Parents Find Most Concerning: Insights From a Cross-Sectional Survey and Content Analysis
    (JMIR, 2025-05-12) Morgan, Jennifer C.; Badlis, Sarah; Head, Katharine J.; Zimet, Gregory; Cappella, Joseph N.; Kornides, Melanie L.; Communication Studies, School of Liberal Arts
    Background: Parents frequently use social media as a source of information about the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. Our previous work identified that, on Twitter (now X), almost 25% of tweets about the HPV vaccine contain misinformation, and these tweets receive higher audience engagement than accurate tweets. Exposure to misinformation can increase vaccine hesitancy, but the types of misinformation found on social media vary widely, and not all misinformation exposure influences vaccine attitudes and vaccine uptake. Despite the prevalence of misinformation and antivaccine information on social media, little work has assessed parents' assessments of these posts. Objective: This study examines which types of misinformation on Twitter parents find the most concerning. Methods: In April 2022, we surveyed 263 US parents of children ages 7-10 years using a Qualtrics survey panel. They viewed a first round of 9 randomly selected tweets from a pool of 126 tweets circulating on Twitter that contained misinformation about the HPV vaccine. Then parents selected up to 3 that they found most concerning. The process was repeated once more with 9 selected from the pool of 117 messages not shown in the first round. Using this information, a concern score for each tweet was calculated based on the number of parents who viewed the tweet and selected it as concerning. In total, 2 researchers independently coded the misinformation tweets to identify rhetorical strategies used and health concerns mentioned. Multiple linear regression tested whether tweet content significantly predicted the concern score of the tweet. Results: Parental concern about the different misinformation tweets varied widely, with some misinformation being selected as most concerning just 2.8% of the time it was viewed and other misinformation being selected 79.5% of the time it was viewed. Multiple beta regression analyses found that misinformation tweets using negative emotional appeals (b=.79, P<.001), expressing pharmaceutical company skepticism (b=.36, P=.036), invoking governmental authority (b=.44, P=.02), and mentioning hospitalization (b=1.00, P=.003), paralysis (b=.54, P=.02), and infertility (b=.52, P=.04) significantly increased the percent of parents rating the misinformation tweets as most concerning. Conclusions: Misinformation about HPV vaccination is ubiquitous on social media, and it would be impossible to target and correct all of it. Counter-messaging campaigns and interventions to combat misinformation need to focus on the types of misinformation that concern parents and ultimately may impact vaccine uptake. Results from this study identify the misinformation content that parents find most concerning and provide a useful list of targets for researchers developing interventions to combat misinformation with the goal of increasing HPV vaccine uptake.