Project description:To mitigate the unprecedented health, social, and economic damage of COVID-19, the Philippines is undertaking a nationwide vaccination program to mitigate the effects of the global pandemic. In this study, we interrogated COVID-19 vaccine intent in the country by deploying a nationwide open-access online survey, two months before the rollout of the national vaccination program. The Health Belief Model (HBM) posits that people are likely to adopt disease prevention behaviors and to accept medical interventions like vaccines if there is sufficient motivation and cues to action. A majority of our 7,193 respondents (62.5%) indicated that they were willing to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Moreover, multivariable analysis revealed that HBM constructs were associated with vaccination intention in the Philippines. Perceptions of high susceptibility, high severity, and significant benefits were all good predictors for vaccination intent. We also found that external cues to action were important. Large majorities of our respondents would only receive the COVID-19 vaccines after many others had received it (72.8%) or after politicians had received it (68.2%). Finally, our study revealed that most (21%) were willing to pay an amount of PHP 1,000 (USD20) for the COVID-19 vaccines with an average willing-to-pay amount of PHP1,892 (USD38).
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite an increased risk of subsequent human papillomavirus (HPV)-related malignancies, HPV vaccine initiation rates among cancer survivors remain critically low. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between HPV vaccine intent and subsequent vaccine initiation among cancer survivors by linking data from a cross-sectional survey with state-based immunization registry records. METHODS:Cancer survivors who were 9 to 26 years old were surveyed 1 to 5 years after their treatment to assess their HPV vaccine initiation status, HPV vaccine intent, sociodemographic factors, and vaccine-related health beliefs. HPV vaccine doses/dates were abstracted from the Georgia Registry for Immunization Transactions for 3.5 years after survey participation. Logistic regression models identified factors associated with vaccine intent and subsequent vaccine initiation. RESULTS:Among survivors who were HPV vaccine-naive at survey participation (n = 103), factors associated with vaccine intent included the following: 1) provider recommendation for the HPV vaccine (odds ratio [OR], 5.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-18.1; P = .014), 2) positive general attitude toward vaccines (OR, 4.8; 95% CI, 2.0-11.2; P < .001), and 3) perceived severity of HPV disease (OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.2-9.9; P = .02). Of the vaccine-naive patients, 28 initiated the HPV vaccine at a median of 1.1 years after the survey. Initiation was more likely among survivors who had reported vaccine intent (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.2-12.5; P = .02) and was less likely among older survivors (OR per year, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS:These findings suggest that provider recommendation for the HPV vaccine plays a role in establishing intent, which then translates into subsequent initiation.
Project description:BackgroundIn the USA, HPV vaccine coverage is substantially lower among adolescents from high-income households compared to their low-income counterparts. We examined and compared the factors associated with parental HPV vaccination intentions between socioeconomically divergent groups.MethodsData from unvaccinated and not fully HPV-vaccinated adolescents from the 2017-2021 National Immunization Survey (NIS)-Teen were analyzed. Socioeconomically advantaged vs. deprived groups were identified based on dichotomized income (material capital) and education (social capital). Parental intent to initiate and complete the HPV vaccine series was compared using bivariable analysis and the factors associated with lacking intent were identified.FindingsThe 2017-2021 NIS-Teen included a total of 212,643 participants; the final analytical sample consisted of 105,958 adolescents (an estimated 10.3 million adolescents) who were unvaccinated or not fully vaccinated. In the advantaged group, 64.7% of parents of unvaccinated adolescents (equating to 2.4 million US adolescents) had no intention to initiate the HPV vaccine compared to 40.9% of parents in the deprived group (equating to 0.2 million adolescents) (P < 0.0001; S > 13.29). The most frequent reason for lacking intent in the advantaged group was 'safety concerns' (25.5%). In the deprived group, 'lack of knowledge', 'not recommended', and 'not needed' were common reasons (nearly 15% each). Lack of intent to complete the HPV vaccine series was higher in the advantaged group (43.9%; 1.1 million adolescents) compared to the deprived group (25.2%; 0.08 million adolescents) (P < 0.0001; S > 13.29). More than half in the advantaged group (58.4%) and over a third (37.1%) in the deprived group cited 'already up to date' as the main reason for not completing the HPV vaccine series.InterpretationLack of intent to initiate and complete the HPV vaccination series, particularly among socioeconomically advantaged parents is a significant barrier to achieving the national goal in the USA.FundingThe US National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, MUSC Hollings Cancer Center Seed funding, and the US National Cancer Institutes.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine hesitancy among parents contributes to low vaccination coverage in adolescents. To improve health care provider communication and vaccine recommendation practices with hesitant parents, it is important to understand how providers perceive parental HPV vaccine hesitancy. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to characterize perceived reasons for parental HPV vaccine hesitancy and identify factors associated with perceived parental hesitancy among providers at community-based pediatric clinics. METHODS:In 2018, providers in 23 community-based pediatric clinics in Tennessee were invited to complete a Web-based baseline survey as part of a larger quality improvement study focused on HPV vaccine uptake. These survey data were used for a cross-sectional, secondary data analysis. Scale scores ranging from 0 to 100 were calculated for provider self-efficacy (confidence in ability to recommend HPV vaccine), provider outcome expectations (expectations that recommendation will influence parents' decisions), and perceived parental HPV vaccine hesitancy. Provider confidence in HPV vaccine safety and effectiveness were categorized as high versus low. Clinic-level exposures examined were clinic size and rural-urban location. Descriptive analyses were used to characterize perceived parental barriers by provider type. Mixed-effects linear regression models were fit taking one exposure variable at a time, whereas controlling for provider type, age, gender, and race to identify provider- and clinic-level factors associated with perceived parental barriers to HPV vaccination. RESULTS:Of the 187 providers located in the 23 clinics, 137 completed the survey. The majority of physician providers were white and female, with a higher percentage of females among nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs). The most common parental barriers to HPV vaccination perceived by providers were concerns about HPV vaccine safety (88%), child being too young (78%), low risk of HPV infection for child through sexual activity (70%), and mistrust in vaccines (59%). In adjusted mixed models, perceived parental HPV vaccine hesitancy was significantly associated with several provider-level factors: self-efficacy (P=.001), outcome expectations (P<.001), and confidence in HPV vaccine safety (P=.009). No significant associations were observed between perceived parental HPV vaccine hesitancy and clinic-level factors clinic size nor location. CONCLUSIONS:Researchers developing provider-focused interventions to reduce parental HPV vaccine hesitancy should consider addressing providers' self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and confidence in HPV vaccine safety to help providers communicate more effectively with HPV vaccine hesitant parents.
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccination started in Romania in December 2020. Child vaccination started in 2021 with children aged 12-15 years in August. For children aged 5-11 years, vaccination started in January 2022. The aim of our study was to describe COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in Romanian children and vaccine acceptability in the general population. As parental consent is required for child vaccination in Romania, these aspects have a significant association.MethodsAn analytical cross-sectional survey was conducted in October and November 2021 during the peak of the 4th COVID-19 wave.ResultsAfter validation, 1645 participants formed the main study group: median age 35 years, 72.83% women, and 35.44% from the medical domain. In total, 1311 (79.70%) participants were vaccinated against COVID-19 and 188 (11.42%) had vaccinated their 12-18-year-old children against COVID-19. Parents' level of education, geographic area of residence, and COVID-19 vaccination status were significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccination. The hesitancy factors of child vaccination included the novelty of COVID-19 vaccines (62, 47.32%), fear of adverse reactions (32, 24.42%), and anti-vaccinism in general (29, 22.13%). In the studied group, only 188 (11.42%) participants recommended vaccination of 5-11-year-old children. Vaccine acceptability was higher in the general population (1311, 79.70%) than in the medical domain (326 out of 583, 55.91%). General vaccine hesitancy was based mainly on beliefs regarding inefficiency (131, 39.22%) and fears about the side effects of the vaccine (76, 22.75%).ConclusionsOverall, the acceptability of COVD-19 vaccines in the Romanian population was influenced by the level of education, area of residence, and being a COVID-19-vaccinated parent. Public health intervention programs are essential.
Project description:AimTo assess parental knowledge and attitudes related to MMR vaccination and to determine factors associated with parental decision whether to vaccinate their child with MMR vaccine in Serbian population.MethodsThe selection of participants was performed using multi-phase sampling. Seventeen out of the total 160 public health centers on the territory of Republic of Serbia were randomly selected. All parents of children up to the age of 7 who visited the pediatrician at the public health centers from June to August 2017 were recruited. Parents filled in an anonymous questionnaire regarding their knowledge, attitudes and practices in immunization with MMR vaccine. The relative contribution of different factors was explored by univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis.ResultsThe majority of parents were female (75.2%), with mean age of 34.3 ± 5.7 years, and the average age of children was 4.7 ± 2.4 years, 53.7% of them were girls. In the multivariable model, getting information on vaccination from a pediatrician was associated with 7.5 fold increased probability to vaccinate child with MMR vaccine (OR = 7.52; 95% CI 2.73-20.74; p<0.001), while previous vaccination of the child increased this chance two times (OR = 2.07; 95% CI 1.01-4.27; p = 0.048), and having two children was associated with 84% increase in chance of vaccinating child with MMR vaccine compared to having one child or three or more children (OR = 1.84; 95% CI 1.03-3.29; p = 0.040).ConclusionOur study emphasized the key role of pediatricians in the formation of parental attitude on MMR vaccination of their child.
Project description:PurposeA nuanced understanding of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine hesitancy is key to tailoring public health interventions to reach HPV vaccination goals in the United States. We aimed to understand the spectrum of parental vaccine hesitancy and identify reasons for lack of vaccination.MethodsUsing cross-sectional data from the 2019 National Immunization Survey-Teen, we examined parents of adolescents aged 13-17 years who had not initiated HPV vaccination. Parents who did not intend to vaccinate their child in the next year were classified into three categories: "unsure," "somewhat hesitant," or "very hesitant." Survey-weighted multinomial logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with level of vaccine hesitancy.ResultsOf the 13,090 parents of unvaccinated adolescents, 8,253 (63%) were hesitant. Among those, 63% were very hesitant, 29% were somewhat hesitant, and 8% were unsure. Parents who had received a provider recommendation were less likely to be unsure (adjusted relative risk ratio 0.3, 95% confidence interval 0.2-0.4) or somewhat hesitant (adjusted relative risk ratio 0.8, 95% confidence interval 0.6-0.9). Compared with non-Hispanic White parents, parents of minority race/ethnicity adolescents were more likely to be unsure versus very hesitant. Safety concerns/side effects were the most common reason for lack of intent to vaccinate among very (30%) and somewhat hesitant parents (20%), whereas lack of provider recommendation was the most common reason among unsure parents (34%).DiscussionWe identify three distinct levels of HPV vaccine hesitancy and demonstrate that the characteristics and reasons for lack of vaccination differ among these levels. Understanding a parent's level of hesitancy may help maximize the potential impact of public health interventions to reach HPV vaccination goals.
Project description:ObjectiveWe surveyed a diverse group of US participants to understand parental COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.MethodsWe administered a telephone and online survey from May 7-June 7, 2021 using stratified sampling to ensure robust sample sizes of racial and ethnic minorities. Of the 20,280 contacted, 12,288 respondents completed the survey (response rate 61%). We used chi-square tests and adjusted risk ratios to compare results by racial/ethnic group.ResultsOverall, 23% of parents stated that they plan to (or have) vaccinated their children; 30% said that they would not vaccinate their children, and 25% were unsure. Latino/a, Native American, and AAPI parents were generally more likely to vaccinate their children than Black or White parents. After adjusting for demographic factors, AAPI parents were significantly more likely to vaccinate their children than were others. Of parents who said that they would not vaccinate their child, 55% stated it was due to insufficient research. However, over half of parents stated that they would follow their child's healthcare provider's recommendations. After adjusting for demographic factors, trust in their primary care doctor was significantly lower among AAPI, Black, and Native American parents than White parents.ConclusionsParental vaccine hesitancy was similar overall, but drivers of hesitancy varied by racial/ethnic groups. While the perception that vaccines had been "insufficiently researched" was a major concern among all groups, we found that parents are generally inclined to follow health providers' recommendations. Health professionals can play an important role in COVID-19 vaccine education and should provide access to vaccines.
Project description:We conducted a nationally representative survey of parents' beliefs and self-reported behaviors regarding childhood vaccinations. Using Bayesian selection among multivariate models, we found that beliefs, even those without any vaccine or health content, predicted vaccine-hesitant behaviors better than demographics, social network effects, or scientific reasoning. The multivariate structure of beliefs combined many types of ideation that included concerns about both conspiracies and side effects. Although they are not strongly related to vaccine-hesitant behavior, demographics were key predictors of beliefs. Our results support some of the previously proposed pro-vaccination messaging strategies and suggest some new strategies not previously considered.
Project description:ObjectiveTo measure knowledge and awareness of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in the USA, the UK and Australia.MethodsParticipants in the USA, UK and Australia completed an anonymous web-based survey measuring awareness and knowledge of HPV (n=2409). We report analyses on a subsample of 1473 men and women in the USA (n=617), UK (n=404) and Australia (n=452) who had heard of HPV and completed questions about HPV testing.ResultsOverall, 50% of the sample (742/1473) had heard of HPV testing. Awareness of HPV testing was higher in the USA (62%) than in the UK (44%) and Australia (40%) (p<0.001). Among those who had heard of HPV testing, the mean knowledge score (out of 6) was 2.78 (SD: 1.49). No significant differences in knowledge score were found between the countries but, overall, women scored significantly higher than men (2.96 vs 2.52, p<0.001).ConclusionsAwareness of HPV testing among people who have heard of HPV is higher in the USA than in the UK and Australia, but overall knowledge is low. This has important implications in those countries where HPV testing is being used in cervical screening. Increasing knowledge about the implications of HPV test results may help minimise any negative psychological consequences associated with HPV testing. Raising awareness in men could become increasingly important if HPV testing is introduced into the management of other cancers where HPV plays an aetiological role.