COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Turkey: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gulle BT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10728987 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Turkey: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Gulle Bugra Taygun BT Oren Meryem Merve MM Dal Tuba T
Epidemiology and infection 20231124
This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to estimate the prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy in Turkey, which can aid future health policies and strategies. A comprehensive search was conducted on various databases using keywords related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Turkey. Quality assessment was performed using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist for prevalence studies. Data extraction was conducted. The random effect model (DerSimonian and Laird met ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the vaccines' acceptance level and to find the factors influencing pregnant women's vaccination decisions, with the goal of assisting in the development of interventions and promoting more research in this area.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PubMed.Eligibility criteriaStudies providing any kind of quantitative assessment of overall COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among pregnant women in any country or region across the globe.Data extraction and synthesisThe pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women was calculated using the random-effects model. Subgroup (sensitivity) analysis was performed to determine the overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance level to understand the sources of substantial heterogeneity.ResultsOut of the 375 studies identified, 17 studies from four continents assessing 25 147 participants (pregnant women) were included in this study. Among the participants, only 49% (95% CI 42% to 56%, p<0.001) had COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. High-income countries (47%; 95% CI 38% to 55%, p<0.001), participants with fewer than 12 years of education (38%; 95% CI 19% to 58%, p<0.001) and multiparous women (48%; 95% CI 31% to 66%, p<0.001) had lower COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Overall heterogeneity was high (I2 ≥98%), and publication bias was present (p<0.001). A very weak positive correlation between COVID-19 knowledge and COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was observed (r=0.164; 95% CI -0.946 to 0.972; p=0.8359).ConclusionOverall, COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women was low across the studies and considerably low among some specific subgroups of participants. These research findings have implications for the development of effective interventions that could increase the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance level among pregnant women to attain herd immunity.Prospero registration numberCRD42021277754.
| S-EPMC9393853 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe development of effective vaccines was a promising tool for ending the pandemic. However, the success of a vaccination programme hinges on achieving substantial community acceptance. In Cameroon, numerous studies have investigated the level of acceptance, hesitancy, and perception of COVID-19 vaccines, with mixed results. To provide a comprehensive understanding of these parameters, this meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, hesitancy and perception in Cameroon.MethodsA systematic search of online databases, including PubMed, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect, was conducted to identify relevant research articles. This study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The extracted data were compiled in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and analyzed using R statistical software (version 4.3.3). The pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, hesitancy, and perception was calculated using a random-effects meta-analysis. Funnel plots, Egger's, and Begg's tests were used to assess publication bias.ResultsOf the 1,346 records identified through the database search, 20 research articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The random-effects model showed that approximately 31.21% (95% CI: 23.49-38.94) of the participants was willing to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. More than two-thirds of the population (68.49%; 95% CI: 60.65-76.34) were vaccine hesitant. Half of the participants (51.81%; 95% CI: 42.70-60.93), had a negative perception of the COVID-19 vaccine. The acceptance rate progressed from the first semester of 2021 (27.21%; 95% CI: 10.38-44.05) to the first semester of 2022 (45.56%; 95% CI: 25.00-66.12). The pooled vaccine acceptance rate was 29.29% (95% CI: 19.86-38.72) for the general population and 39.24% (95% CI: 22.84-55.64) for healthcare workers. The pooled vaccine hesitancy rate was 70.39% (95% CI: 61.30-79.80) for the general population and 57.42% (95% CI: 4.05-71.80) for healthcare workers.ConclusionAlthough progress in vaccine acceptance, targeted interventions remain necessary to address vaccine hesitancy in the country. Strategies such as enhancing access to accurate information, fostering trust in institutions, and strengthening community engagement remain crucial for increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake.
| S-EPMC11916848 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has had a significant impact on human lives, and the development of effective vaccines has been a promising solution to bring an end to the pandemic. However, the success of a vaccination program heavily relies on a significant portion of the population being vaccinated. Recent studies have indicated a rise in vaccine hesitancy over time and inconsistent factors affecting it. This study aimed to synthesis of the pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and associated factors among various communities in East Africa.MethodsThe review encompassed relevant descriptive and observational studies conducted between January 1, 2020, and December 26, 2023. We browsed various databases, including PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, African online Journal, cross-references, and Web of Science. After extracted and exported to R the data analysis was performed using R version 4.2. Meta-package were used to estimate the pooled prevalence and factors of vaccine hesitancy. Publication bias was assessed through funnel plots, Egger's test, and trim-and-fill methods.ResultsAfter carefully screening an initial pool of 53,984 studies, a total of 79 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall pooled prevalence of vaccine hesitancy was 40.40% (95% CI: 35.89%; 45.47%, I2: 99.5%). Identified factors influencing vaccine hesitance were female sex, under 40 years old, inadequate prevention practices, relying on web/internet as a source of information, having a negative attitude towards the vaccine, uncertainty about vaccine safety, fear of adverse effects, uncertainty about contracting COVID-19, and belief in conspiracy myths.ConclusionsApproximately four out of ten individuals in this region express hesitancy towards vaccination. A tailored approach that considers the socio-demographic context could significantly reduce this hesitancy. To achieve high vaccination coverage, a comprehensive strategy is essential, necessitating substantial social, scientific, and health efforts. The success of vaccination campaigns within this population relies on the widespread and consistent implementation of effective interventions.RegistrationRegistered in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42024501415.
| S-EPMC11470748 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesPatients with cancer are more vulnerable to COVID-19 morbidity and morbidity than the general population and have been prioritised in COVID-19 vaccination programmes. This study aims to investigate COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among patients with cancer.Study designThis was a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsPubMed, ScienceDirect and the Cochrane COVID-19 study registry were searched in addition to secondary literature using a predefined search method. Two authors independently performed the study identification, screening and eligibility assessment. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines and Joanna Brides' Institute quality appraisal tools.ResultsA total of 29 studies and reports were selected for the final review. The pooled prevalence of vaccine acceptance was 59% (95% confidence interval 52-67%, I2: 99%). Concerns about vaccine-related side-effects, uncertainty about vaccine efficacy and safety, ongoing active anticancer therapies and scepticism about rapid vaccine development were the leading causes for vaccine hesitancy. Female gender and undergoing active anticancer treatments were significant factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Early cancer stages (stages I and II) and good compliance with prior influenza vaccinations were significant factors associated with the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine.ConclusionsMany patients with cancer are hesitant about COVID-19 vaccination. Well-designed problem-based educational interventions will increase compliance with COVID-19 vaccination.
| S-EPMC9452406 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe pandemic of COVID-19 disease has caused severe impact globally. Governments consider vaccination as an effective measure to control pandemic. However, many people have been hesitant to receive COVID-19 vaccine, particularly periconceptional and lactating women. Although research has indicated that pregnant women with COVID-19 are at a higher risk of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes, as well as severe illness. There appears to be a lack of systematic and comprehensive evidence of the prevalence and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among periconceptional and lactating women. As a result, it has been essential to investigate periconceptional and lactating women's vaccination views and behaviours. This study will review articles on vaccine hesitancy among periconceptional and lactating women to assess the impact of the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy during the pandemic.Methods and analysisWe will systematically search observational studies from 1 November 2019 to 30 October 2021 in the following databases: Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, WHO COVID-19 Database, CNKI and WanFang Database. The following medical subject headings and free-text terms will be used: "COVID-19 vaccines" AND "female" AND "vaccine hesitancy". Eligibility criteria are as follows: population (women of reproductive age); exposure (currently pregnant, lactational or trying to get pregnant); comparison (general women who are not in preconception, gestation or lactation) and outcome (the rate of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy). Article screening and data extraction will be undertaken independently by two reviewers, and any discrepancy will be resolved through discussion. We will use I2 statistics to assess heterogeneity and perform a meta-analysis when sufficiently homogeneous studies are provided. We will explore the potential sources of heterogeneity using subgroup and meta-regression analysis.Ethics and disseminationThis study will use published data, so ethical approval is not required. The findings will be disseminated by publication in peer-reviewed journal(s).Prospero registration numberCRD42021257511.
| S-EPMC9644077 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Nigerian healthcare professionals.MethodsAn extensive language-unrestricted literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and the African Index Medicus to identify studies reporting hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers in Nigeria. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cross-sectional studies. A single-arm meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.ResultsOf the 206 articles, 22 publications with 20,724 participants were included. The pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was 75% (95% CI: 61%-88%, I2 = 99.69%, P < 0.001). Reasons for hesitancy, including concerns about side effects, lack of trust, and safety, were prevalent at 76% (CI: 0.57-0.94, I2 = 99.24%, P < 0.001), 55% (CI: 0.042-0.272, I2 = 97.42%, P < 0.001), and 68% (CI: 0.047-0.89, I2 = 98.59%, P < 0.001), respectively.ConclusionThere was significant hesitancy among Nigerian healthcare workers towards COVID-19 vaccination; thus, strategies to increase vaccination acceptance among healthcare workers should be developed.
| S-EPMC11836585 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccine hesitancy plays a crucial role in worldwide pandemic-control efforts. The multifaceted nature of vaccine hesitancy entails many psychological factors that are widely discussed in the literature, although few studies specifically compile these factors. Thus, this systematic review aims to synthesize the psychological factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy. As per the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines, a systematic search was conducted on electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, PsycNET, and Web of Science, and a manual search was conducted on Google Scholar. Out of the 2289 articles obtained, 79 studies that met the inclusion criteria were deemed eligible for the review. The findings highlight appraisals of the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccine safety and side effects, vaccine confidence/trust, trust in government and healthcare professionals, scepticism around vaccine production, conspiracy beliefs, emotions, and information and knowledge about the vaccine as the major psychological factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy. Concerningly, misinformation on COVID-19 vaccination spread through social media platforms, increasing vaccine hesitancy. Recommendations for government authorities, healthcare professionals, and implications for future research are also outlined.
| S-EPMC9698528 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Although mass vaccination is considered one of the most effective public health strategies during the pandemic, in the COVID-19 era, many people considered vaccines unnecessary and, or doubted the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine. This review aimed to tabulate cognitive causes of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy, which may help public health policymakers overcome the barriers to mass vaccinations in future pandemics. Methods: For this systematic review, studies pertaining to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy published up to June 2022 were retrieved from six online databases (Cochrane Library, Google Scholar Medline through PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science). Inclusion criteria were the studies conducted on people who had a delay in accepting or refusing COVID-19 vaccines, reported the impact of cognitive determinants on vaccine hesitancy, and were written in English in the timeframe of 2020-2022. Results: This systematic review initially reviewed 1171 records. From these 91 articles met the inclusion criteria. The vaccination hesitation rate was 29.72% on average. This systematic review identified several cognitive determinants influencing vaccination hesitancy. Lack of confidence and complacency were the most frequent factors that predicted vaccine hesitancy. Conclusion: The identified prevailing cognitive determinants for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy indicated that using initiative and effective communication strategies would be a determinant factor in building people's trust in vaccines during the pandemic and mass vaccinations.
| S-EPMC10257562 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite the effectiveness of current vaccines in reducing the spread and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infections, many people, including migrants, refugees, and foreign workers, are hesitant to be vaccinated. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) was conducted to determine the pooled prevalence estimate of the acceptance and hesitancy rates of the COVID-19 vaccine among these populations. A comprehensive search of the peer-reviewed literature indexed in PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, and Web of Science databases was conducted. Initially, 797 potential records were identified, of which 19 articles met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of proportions using data from 14 studies revealed that the overall acceptance rate of COVID vaccination among 29,152 subjects was 56.7% (95% CI: 44.9-68.5%), while the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy among 26,154 migrants reported in 12 studies was estimated to be 31.7% (95% CI: 44.9-68.5%). The acceptance rate for the COVID-19 vaccination first declined from 77.3% in 2020 to 52.9% in 2021 and then slightly increased to 56.1% in 2022. The most frequent factors influencing vaccine hesitancy were worries about vaccine efficacy and safety. Intensive vaccination campaigns should be implemented to raise vaccination awareness among migrants, which will increase the acceptance rate for the COVID-19 vaccine and result in herd immunity.
| S-EPMC10302060 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the prevalence and factors associated with vaccine hesitancy and vaccine unwillingness in Canada. Eleven databases were searched in March 2022. The pooled prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy and unwillingness was estimated. Subgroup analyses and meta-regressions were performed. Out of 667 studies screened, 86 full-text articles were reviewed, and 30 were included in the systematic review. Twenty-four articles were included in the meta-analysis; 12 for the pooled prevalence of vaccine hesitancy (42.3% [95% CI, 33.7%-51.0%]) and 12 for vaccine unwillingness (20.1% [95% CI, 15.2%-24.9%]). Vaccine hesitancy was higher in females (18.3% [95% CI, 12.4%-24.2%]) than males (13.9% [95% CI, 9.0%-18.8%]), and in rural (16.3% [95% CI, 12.9%-19.7%]) versus urban areas (14.1% [95%CI, 9.9%-18.3%]). Vaccine unwillingness was higher in females (19.9% [95% CI, 11.0%-24.8%]) compared with males (13.6% [95% CI, 8.0%-19.2%]), non-White individuals (21.7% [95% CI, 16.2%-27.3%]) than White individuals (14.8% [95% CI, 11.0%-18.5%]), and secondary or less (24.2% [95% CI, 18.8%-29.6%]) versus postsecondary education (15.9% [95% CI, 11.6%-20.2%]). Factors related to racial disparities, gender, education level, and age are discussed.
| S-EPMC9538578 | biostudies-literature