Dataset Information

Impact of societal resilience on vaccine hesitancy and uptake: Lessons learned from the Israeli experience.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Vaccine hesitancy threatens COVID-19 pandemic management. Increasing vaccine uptake is important to containment of the virus, and achievement of herd immunity.

Objective

To identify factors of resilience, distress, and well-being that impact vaccine hesitancy and uptake.

Method

A cross-sectional study was conducted during the pandemic's fourth wave. The data were collected by an internet panel company. A representative sample of Israeli residents (N = 2002) answered an online questionnaire. A stratified sampling method was employed regarding geographic distribution, gender, and age. As vaccine hesitancy poses a threat to the effective management of the pandemic, the outcome measures included vaccine hesitancy and uptake (dependent variables), and resilience, distress, and well-being (independent variables).

Results

24% of respondents reported a high level of vaccine hesitancy; 68% received 3 vaccines; 5% did not receive any vaccine. Six predictors together explained 22% of vaccine hesitancy and 15% of vaccine uptake.Path analysis indicated that: (a) Societal resilience was the best predictor of vaccine hesitancy and uptake: the higher the societal resilience, the lower vaccine hesitancy, and the higher vaccine uptake. (b) The higher sense of danger, the higher vaccine hesitancy, and the lower vaccine uptake. (c) The higher level of religiosity, the lower vaccine uptake. (d) The higher the family income, the lower level of vaccine hesitancy.

Conclusions

Findings suggest that public attitudes are primarily influenced by the degree of trust in the leadership and other components of societal resilience. Further research should investigate the impact of transparency concerning COVID-19 decision-making on vaccine hesitancy and uptake.

SUBMITTER: Kimhi S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9293373 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe rapid development and rollout of COVID-19 vaccines helped reduce the pandemic's mortality burden. The vaccine rollout, however, has been uneven; it is well known that vaccination rates tend to be lower in lower income countries. Vaccine uptake, however, ultimately depends on the willingness of individuals to get vaccinated. If vaccine confidence is low, then uptake will be low, regardless of country income level. We investigated the impact on country-level COVID-19 vaccination rates of both national income and vaccine hesitancy.MethodsWe estimated a linear regression model of COVID-19 vaccine uptake across 145 countries; this cross-sectional model was estimated at each of four time points: 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after the onset of global vaccine distribution. Vaccine uptake reflects the percentage of the population that had completed their primary vaccination series at the time point. Covariates include per capita GDP, an estimate of the percentage of country residents who strongly disagreed that vaccines are safe, and a variety of control variables. Next, we estimated these models of vaccine uptake by country income (countries below, and above the international median per capita GDP) to examine whether the impact of vaccine hesitancy varies by country income.ResultsWe find that GDP per capita has a pronounced impact on vaccine uptake at 6 months after global rollout. After controlling for other factors, there was a 22 percentage point difference in vaccination rates between the top 20% and the bottom 20% of countries ranked by per capita GDP; this difference grew to 38% by 12 months. The deleterious impact of distrust of vaccine safety on vaccine uptake became apparent by 12 months and then increased over time. At 24 months, there was a 17% difference in vaccination rates between the top 20% and the bottom 20% of countries ranked by distrust. The income stratified models reveal that the deleterious impact of vaccine distrust on vaccine uptake at 12 and 24 months is particularly evident in lower income countries.ConclusionsOur study highlights the important role of both national income and vaccine hesitancy in determining COVID-19 vaccine uptake globally. There is a need to increase the supply and distribution of pandemic vaccines to lower-income countries, and to take measures to improve vaccine confidence in these countries.

Project description:BackgroundThe National Health Insurance Law enacted in 1995 stipulates a list of health services to which all Israeli residents are entitled. For the past 20 years, the list has been updated annually, as a function of a predetermined budget, according to recommendations from the Public National Advisory Committee (PNAC), which evaluates and prioritizes candidate technologies. We assessed the legitimacy of this resource-allocation process as reflected in Israeli public discourse and its congruence with the accountability for reasonableness (A4R) framework.MethodsA qualitative analysis of public discourse documents (articles in the print media, court rulings and parliamentary debates (N = 119) was conducted to assess the perceived legitimacy by the Israeli public of the PNAC. Further content analysis of these documents and semi-structured interviews with stakeholders (N = 70) revealed the mainstays and threats to its legitimacy. Based on these data sources, on governmental documents specifying PNAC's procedures, and on data from participant observations, we assessed its congruence with A4R's four conditions: publicity, relevance, revision and appeals, regulation.ResultsThe PNAC enjoys ongoing support for its legitimacy in Israeli public discourse, which stem from its perceived professional focus and transparency. These strengths are consistent with the A4R's emphasis on the publicity and the relevance conditions. The three major threats to PNAC's legitimacy pertain to: (1) the composition of the committee; (2) its operating procedures; (3) its guiding principles. These perceived shortcomings are also consistent with incongruencies between PNAC's work model and A4R. These findings thus further support the empirical validity of the A4R.ConclusionThe analysis of the fit between the PNAC and A4R points to refinements in all four conditions that could make the A4R a more precise evaluative framework. Concurrently, it highlights areas that the PNAC should improve to increase its legitimacy, such as incorporating cost-effectiveness analyses and including patient representatives in the decision-making process. Hebrew and Arabic abstracts for this article are available as an additional file.