A call for immediate action to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake to prepare for the third pandemic winter

Betsch, Cornelia; Schmid, Philipp; Verger, Pierre; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Soveri, Anna; Hertwig, Ralph; Fasce, Angelo; Holford, Dawn Liu; Raeve, Paul De; Gagneur, Arnaud; Vuolanto, Pia; Correia, Tiago; Tavoschi, Lara; Declich, Silvia; Marceca, Maurizio; Linos, Athena; Karnaki, Pania; Karlsson, Linda C.; Garrison, Amanda

doi:10.1038/s41467-022-34995-y

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Perceiving barriers are closely tied to whether they decide in favour of or against vaccination. A broader and more visible vaccination offering by specialized medical practitioners and pharmacies could be helpful in this regard [ 25 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring pre-pandemic patterns of vaccine decision-making with the 5C model: results from representative surveys in 2016 and 2018

Eitze,

Felgendreff,

Horstkötter

et al. 2024

BMC Public Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The 5C psychological antecedents of vaccination (Confidence, Complacency, Constraints, Calculation, and Collective Responsibility) facilitate understanding vaccination decisions in specific target groups as well as the general public’s informational needs. This study aims to explain pre-pandemic vaccination behaviour (a) in general, (b) for specific vaccines such as influenza, and (c) for certain target groups (e.g. people over the age of 59 years, parents, healthcare workers), using the 5C model and sociodemographic variables. The intention to get an influenza vaccination was also analysed for target groups. Methods The 5C, self-reported vaccination behaviour and the intention to vaccinate were collected in two representative telephone surveys in Germany – one in 2016 (n1 = 5,012) and another in 2018 (n2 = 5,054). Parents, people over the age of 59 years, chronically ill people, people with a migratory background, pregnant women and healthcare workers were target groups. Results Overall, the 5C model had higher explanatory power than sociodemographic variables. The pattern of vaccine hesitancy slightly differed between vaccinations and target groups. Confidence in safety and effectiveness was always a significant predictor. Complacency (the underestimation of disease risks) and Constraints were significant predictors as well. Calculation (of risks and benefits) was important for influenza vaccination intentions. Conclusions This work builds an important benchmark for understanding potential changes in vaccine acceptance due to the pandemic. The benchmark can be used in research on potential effects of the pandemic on vaccination behaviours. Intervention designers can also use the results to understand specific audiences and their vaccination decisions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring pre-pandemic patterns of vaccine decision-making with the 5C model: results from representative surveys in 2016 and 2018

Eitze,

Felgendreff,

Horstkötter

et al. 2024

BMC Public Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, concern about jeopardizing public vaccine acceptance is likely what prevents governments, including the German government, from transparently communicating information about potential harms. 19,20 Yet Petersen and colleagues 19 found that transparency about the potential harms of COVID-19 vaccines considerably increased people's trust in health authorities and helped to contain the spread of conspiracy beliefs; they consequently warned against withholding information. In the present study, we deliberately reported potential harms, in accordance with evidence-based transparent reporting in health care.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evidence from a large study with representative samples of US residents and Danes (with more than 13,000 participants) showed that disclosing information on the potential harms of COVID-19 vaccination can increase vaccine hesitancy. Indeed, concern about jeopardizing public vaccine acceptance is likely what prevents governments, including the German government, from transparently communicating information about potential harms . Yet Petersen and colleagues found that transparency about the potential harms of COVID-19 vaccines considerably increased people’s trust in health authorities and helped to contain the spread of conspiracy beliefs; they consequently warned against withholding information.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vaccination Intention Following Receipt of Vaccine Information Through Interactive Simulation vs Text Among COVID-19 Vaccine–Hesitant Adults During the Omicron Wave in Germany

Wegwarth

Mansmann

Zepp³

et al. 2023

JAMA Netw Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceHesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccination is a major factor in stagnating uptake rates and in the risk of health care systems becoming overwhelmed.ObjectiveTo compare an interactive risk ratio simulation (intervention) with a conventional text-based risk information format (control) and analyze change in participants’ COVID-19 vaccination intention and benefit-to-harm assessment.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsCross-sectional study conducted online with 1255 COVID-19 vaccine–hesitant adult residents of Germany in April and May 2022, surveyed using a probability-based internet panel maintained by respondi, a research and analytics firm. Participants were randomized to 1 of 2 presentations on the benefits and adverse events associated with vaccination.ExposureParticipants were randomized to a text-based description vs an interactive simulation presenting age-adjusted absolute risks of infection, hospitalization, ICU admission, and death after exposure to coronavirus in vaccinated vs unvaccinated individuals relative to the possible adverse effects as well as additional (population-level) benefits of COVID-19 vaccination.Main Outcomes and MeasuresAbsolute change in respondents’ COVID-19 vaccination intention category and benefit-to-harm assessment category.ResultsParticipants were 1255 COVID-19 vaccine–hesitant residents of Germany (660 women [52.6%]; mean [SD] age, 43.6 [13.5] years). A total of 651 participants received a text-based description, and 604 participants received an interactive simulation. Relative to the text-based format, the simulation was associated with greater likelihood of positive change in vaccination intentions (19.5% vs 15.3%, respectively; absolute difference, 4.2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.45; 95% CI, 1.07-1.96; P = .01) and benefit-to-harm assessments (32.6% vs 18.0%; absolute difference, 14.6%; aOR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.64-2.80; P &lt; .001). Both formats were also associated with some negative change. However, the net advantage (positive – negative change) of the interactive simulation over the text-based format was 5.3 percentage points for vaccination intention (9.8% vs 4.5%) and 18.3 percentage points for benefit-to-harm assessment (25.3% vs 7.0%). Positive change in vaccination intention (but not in benefit-to-harm assessment) was associated with some demographic characteristics and attitudes to COVID-19 vaccination; negative changes were not.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cross-sectional study, vaccine-hesitant adults presented with an interactive risk ratio simulation were more likely to show positive change in COVID-19 vaccination intention and benefit-to-harm assessment than those presented with a conventional text-based information format. These findings suggest that the interactive risk communication format can be an important tool in addressing vaccination hesitancy and fostering public trust.

show abstract

“…Increasing uptake of a booster vaccination is currently recommended worldwide to prepare for the potential resurgence of COVID-19 due to a new circulating variant to prevent death and reduce transmission among those at most significant risk (Betsch et al, 2022; Lu et al, 2023; Machado et al, 2022; Moola et al, n.d.). However, despite high primary vaccination campaign coverage, global data reveals a slow and unequal rollout of booster doses, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (Schellekens, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 Vaccination Booster Uptake Is Related to End of Pandemic Perception: Population-Based Survey in Four Provinces in Indonesia

Maula,

Indriani,

Arisanti

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global COVID-19 booster vaccination uptake has been low, particularly in low-middle-income countries (LMICs). However, studies on the determinants of COVID-19 booster vaccination remain limited, especially in LMIC settings. This study aims to describe the determinants of COVID-19 booster vaccination uptake in an LMIC context. We analyzed data from a cross-sectional survey that was conducted in September 2022 in four provinces in Indonesia. Participants (n=2,223) were recruited using multiple-stage cluster sampling. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with booster vaccination status. The proportion of COVID-19 booster vaccination among fully vaccinated adults was 29.5%, while fear of transmission (12.4%) and perceived risk of getting a COVID-19 infection (33.5%) were low. Multivariable analysis showed that people living on Java Island (aOR: 2.45, 95% CI: 1.87-3.24), living in the urban area (aOR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.60-2.61), being an employee in the formal sector (aOR: 3.99, 95% CI: 1.93 - 8.58), experiencing a side effect from previous vaccination (aOR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.40-2.09), having a history of SARS-COV2 infection (aOR: 2.10, 95%CI: 1.27-3.50), having perception on the upcoming new wave of COVID-19 (aOR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.07 -1.76), and believing the pandemic has not ended (aOR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.64) were associated with booster shot uptake. Low educational level (aOR: 0.6, 95% CI: 0.39-0.93) inhibited booster vaccination uptake. Current booster dose coverage was considerably lower than the primary vaccination dosage. The low booster vaccination uptake in four provinces was associated with a belief the pandemic has no longer, which might hinder the catch up of wide-population target coverage and COVID-19 control for reduced disease severity and hospitalization. Thus, efforts need to be prioritized in reaching the COVID-19 vulnerable population, which includes elderly and those with comorbidities.

show abstract

A call for immediate action to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake to prepare for the third pandemic winter

Cited by 16 publications

References 67 publications

Exploring pre-pandemic patterns of vaccine decision-making with the 5C model: results from representative surveys in 2016 and 2018

Exploring pre-pandemic patterns of vaccine decision-making with the 5C model: results from representative surveys in 2016 and 2018

Vaccination Intention Following Receipt of Vaccine Information Through Interactive Simulation vs Text Among COVID-19 Vaccine–Hesitant Adults During the Omicron Wave in Germany

COVID-19 Vaccination Booster Uptake Is Related to End of Pandemic Perception: Population-Based Survey in Four Provinces in Indonesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About