Using inclusive language around vaccine hesitancy

Darko, Julia

doi:10.3399/bjgp21x715817

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…16,17 Much of the recent public discourse around COVID-19 vaccines has been divisive, and has often strayed into racist and classist territory to explain patterns of uptake amongst different population groups. 18,19 Vaccine hesitancy, which refers to a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite its availability 20 , is in itself a contested term and considered by some to place blame on certain population groups or individuals, when wider structural forces are at play. [21][22] These include access to and relationship with health services, long standing mistrust in institutions, poor or inappropriate methods of health communication and socio-economic factors such as being unable to travel to vaccination centres or get time off work to attend a vaccination appointment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compliant citizens, defiant rebels or neither? Exploring changing COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and decisions in Bradford, UK: Findings from a follow-up qualitative study

Lockyer

Moss

Endacott

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: COVID-19 vaccines have been the central pillar of the public health response to the pandemic, intended to enable us to "live with Covid". It is important to understand COVID-19 vaccines attitudes and decisions in order to maximise uptake through an empathetic lens. Objective: To explore the factors that influenced people's COVID-19 vaccines decisions and how attitudes towards the vaccines had changed in an eventful year. Design and participants: This is a follow up study that took place in Bradford, UK one year after the original study, between October 2021 and January 2022. In-depth phone interviews were conducted with 12 (of the 20 originally interviewed) people from different ethnic groups and areas of Bradford. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted. Results: 11 of the 12 participants interviewed had received both doses of the COVID-19 vaccine and most intended to have a booster dose. Participants described a variety of reasons why they had decided to have the vaccines, including: feeling at increased risk at work; protecting family and others in their communities, unrestricted travel and being influenced by the vaccine decisions of family, friends and colleagues. All participants discussed ongoing interaction with COVID-19 misinformation and for some this meant they were uneasy about their decision to have the vaccine. They described feeling overloaded by and disengaged from COVID-19 information, which they often found contradictory and some felt mistrustful of the UK government's motives and decisions during the pandemic. Conclusions: The majority of participants had managed to navigate an overwhelming amount of circulating COVID-19 misinformation and chosen to have two or more COVID-19 vaccines, even if they had been previously said they were unsure. However, these decisions were complicated, and demonstrate the continuum of vaccine hesitancy and acceptance. This follow up study underlines that vaccine attitudes are changeable and contextual. Patient or Public Contribution: The original study was developed through a rapid community and stakeholder engagement process in 2020. Discussion with the Bradford Council Public Health team and the public through the Bradford COVID-19 Community Insights Group was undertaken in 2021 to identify important priorities for this follow up study.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compliant citizens, defiant rebels or neither? Exploring changing COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and decisions in Bradford, UK: Findings from a follow-up qualitative study

Lockyer

Moss

Endacott

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much of the recent public discourse around COVID‐19 vaccines has been divisive and has often strayed into racist and classist territory to explain patterns of uptake amongst different population groups 18,19 . Vaccine hesitancy, which refers to a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite its availability, 20 is in itself a contested term and considered by some to place blame on certain population groups or individuals, when wider structural forces are at play 21,22 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16,17 Much of the recent public discourse around COVID-19 vaccines has been divisive and has often strayed into racist and classist territory to explain patterns of uptake amongst different population groups. 18,19 Vaccine hesitancy, which refers to a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite its availability, 20 is in itself a contested term and considered by some to place blame on certain population groups or individuals, when wider structural forces are at play. 21,22 These include access to and relationship with health services, long-standing mistrust in institutions, poor or inappropriate methods of health communication and socioeconomic factors such as being unable to travel to vaccination centres or get time off work to attend a vaccination appointment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compliant citizens, defiant rebels or neither? Exploring change and complexity in COVID‐19 vaccine attitudes and decisions in Bradford, UK: Findings from a follow‐up qualitative study

Lockyer

Moss

Endacott

et al. 2022

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background COVID‐19 vaccines have been the central pillar of the public health response to the pandemic, intended to enable us to ‘live with Covid’. It is important to understand change and complexity of COVID‐19 vaccines attitudes and decisions to maximize uptake through an empathetic lens. Objective To explore the factors that influenced people's COVID‐19 vaccines decisions and how their complex attitudes towards the vaccines had changed in an eventful year. Design and Participants This is a follow‐up study that took place in Bradford, UK between October 2021 and January 2022, 1 year after the original study. In‐depth phone interviews were conducted with 12 (of the 20 originally interviewed) people from different ethnic groups and areas of Bradford. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted. Results Eleven of the 12 participants interviewed had received both doses of the COVID‐19 vaccine and most intended to have a booster dose. Participants described a variety of reasons why they had decided to have the vaccines, including the following: feeling at increased risk at work; protecting family and others in their communities; unrestricted travel and being influenced by the vaccine decisions of family, friends and colleagues. All participants discussed ongoing interaction with COVID‐19 misinformation and for some, this meant they were uneasy about their decision to have the vaccine. They described feeling overloaded by and disengaged from COVID‐19 information, which they often found contradictory and some felt mistrustful of the UK Government's motives and decisions during the pandemic. Conclusions The majority of participants had managed to navigate an overwhelming amount of circulating COVID‐19 misinformation and chosen to have two or more COVID‐19 vaccines, even if they had been previously said they were unsure. However, these decisions were complicated, demonstrating the continuum of vaccine hesitancy and acceptance. This follow‐up study underlines that vaccine attitudes are changeable and contextual. Patient or Public Contribution The original study was developed through a rapid community and stakeholder engagement process in 2020. Discussion with the Bradford Council Public Health team and the public through the Bradford COVID‐19 Community Insights Group was undertaken in 2021 to identify important priorities for this follow‐up study.

show abstract

Power, place, and access: Why history is at the center of black D.C. residents of wards 7 and 8 decisions to receive the COVID-19 vaccine

Cho

Mendenhall

2023

SSM - Qualitative Research in Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using inclusive language around vaccine hesitancy

Cited by 4 publications

References 1 publication

Compliant citizens, defiant rebels or neither? Exploring changing COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and decisions in Bradford, UK: Findings from a follow-up qualitative study

Compliant citizens, defiant rebels or neither? Exploring changing COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and decisions in Bradford, UK: Findings from a follow-up qualitative study

Compliant citizens, defiant rebels or neither? Exploring change and complexity in COVID‐19 vaccine attitudes and decisions in Bradford, UK: Findings from a follow‐up qualitative study

Power, place, and access: Why history is at the center of black D.C. residents of wards 7 and 8 decisions to receive the COVID-19 vaccine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About