7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      “If it wasn’t forced upon me, I would have given it a second thought”: Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in an outlier county in the Bay Area, California

      research-article
      * , , ,
      PLOS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          While the San Francisco Bay Area counties rank very low in vaccine hesitancy and high in vaccination rates when compared to national numbers, Solano County has the most residents who are hesitant (6.3%) and the least who are fully vaccinated (51.6%) among Bay Area counties, according to the CDC. No studies to date have been able to provide the in-depth, localized information that would inform county-level public health interventions. This study aims to explore reasons and consequences for remaining unvaccinated in Solano County. Using a qualitative in-depth interview approach, we conducted 32 interviews with unvaccinated adults from Solano County. We used a grounded theory approach to our analysis. Using the socio-ecological model as a framework, we found that reasons for not getting vaccinated were primarily structural (mistrust of public information) and individual (bodily autonomy, personal choice) while consequences were primarily interpersonal (discrimination and stigma from friends, family, and employers). An overarching theme was that the vaccine rollout and messaging felt like an encroachment on personal choice and the feeling of being forced created more mistrust. Participants reported feeling like their decisions made them minorities among their colleagues, friends and family and that they were not persuaded by groupthink or by their relationships. Future public health responses to epidemics and pandemics might consider if a vaccine mandate is the best approach for reaching all county residents.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy in the United States: A Rapid National Assessment

          Given the results from early trials, COVID-19 vaccines will be available by 2021. However, little is known about what Americans think of getting immunized with a COVID-19 vaccine. Thus, the purpose of this study was to conduct a comprehensive and systematic national assessment of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a community-based sample of the American adult population. A multi‐item valid and reliable questionnaire was deployed online via mTurk and social media sites to recruit U.S. adults from the general population. A total of 1878 individuals participated in the study where the majority were: females (52%), Whites (74%), non-Hispanic (81%), married (56%), employed full time (68%), and with a bachelor’s degree or higher (77%). The likelihood of getting a COVID-19 immunization in the study population was: very likely (52%), somewhat likely (27%), not likely (15%), definitely not (7%), with individuals who had lower education, income, or perceived threat of getting infected being more likely to report that they were not likely/definitely not going to get COVID-19 vaccine (i.e., vaccine hesitancy). In unadjusted group comparisons, compared to their counterparts, vaccine hesitancy was higher among African-Americans (34%), Hispanics (29%), those who had children at home (25%), rural dwellers (29%), people in the northeastern U.S. (25%), and those who identified as Republicans (29%). In multiple regression analyses, vaccine hesitancy was predicted significantly by sex, education, employment, income, having children at home, political affiliation, and the perceived threat of getting infected with COVID-19 in the next 1 year. Given the high prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, evidence-based communication, mass media strategies, and policy measures will have to be implemented across the U.S. to convert vaccines into vaccinations and mass immunization with special attention to the groups identified in this study.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Predictors of Intention to Vaccinate Against COVID-19: Results of a Nationwide Survey

            Highlights • Nationwide survey finds that nearly two in five adults reported hesitancy about getting a COVID-19 vaccine when one becomes available. • Significant demographic predictors of intent to vaccinate included being male, older, white, non-Hispanic, married, and higher socio-economic status. • Democrats were more likely to vaccinate than Republicans, and social media users had weaker vaccination intentions than nonusers. • Health predictors of intent to vaccinate included having multiple pre-existing conditions and being currently immunized against influenza. • COVID-19 vaccine promotion requires formative research into the concerns of hesitant people.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Canada: Content Analysis of Tweets Using the Theoretical Domains Framework

              Background With the approval of two COVID-19 vaccines in Canada, many people feel a sense of relief, as hope is on the horizon. However, only about 75% of people in Canada plan to receive one of the vaccines. Objective The purpose of this study is to determine the reasons why people in Canada feel hesitant toward receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. Methods We screened 3915 tweets from public Twitter profiles in Canada by using the search words “vaccine” and “COVID.” The tweets that met the inclusion criteria (ie, those about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy) were coded via content analysis. Codes were then organized into themes and interpreted by using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Results Overall, 605 tweets were identified as those about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy stemmed from the following themes: concerns over safety, suspicion about political or economic forces driving the COVID-19 pandemic or vaccine development, a lack of knowledge about the vaccine, antivaccine or confusing messages from authority figures, and a lack of legal liability from vaccine companies. This study also examined mistrust toward the medical industry not due to hesitancy, but due to the legacy of communities marginalized by health care institutions. These themes were categorized into the following five Theoretical Domains Framework constructs: knowledge, beliefs about consequences, environmental context and resources, social influence, and emotion. Conclusions With the World Health Organization stating that one of the worst threats to global health is vaccine hesitancy, it is important to have a comprehensive understanding of the reasons behind this reluctance. By using a behavioral science framework, this study adds to the emerging knowledge about vaccine hesitancy in relation to COVID-19 vaccines by analyzing public discourse in tweets in real time. Health care leaders and clinicians may use this knowledge to develop public health interventions that are responsive to the concerns of people who are hesitant to receive vaccines.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS One
                plos
                PLOS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                21 December 2023
                2023
                : 18
                : 12
                : e0290469
                Affiliations
                [001] Public Health Program, College of Education and Health Sciences, Touro University California, Vallejo, California, United States of America
                Nova Southeastern University / Yarmouk University, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9376-5528
                https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0835-4301
                Article
                PONE-D-23-13758
                10.1371/journal.pone.0290469
                10735040
                38127963
                edf1d743-33c7-40cb-a747-419b277c3652
                © 2023 Brody et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 30 May 2023
                : 8 August 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 0, Pages: 17
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100013202, Touro University California;
                Award ID: IRAP 2021
                Award Recipient :
                This study was funded by the Touro University California’s Intramural Research Award Program (IRAP) (IRAP 2021 Brody).
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Immunology
                Vaccination and Immunization
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Immunology
                Vaccination and Immunization
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Preventive Medicine
                Vaccination and Immunization
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Infectious Disease Control
                Vaccines
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Viral Diseases
                Covid 19
                Social Sciences
                Sociology
                Human Families
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Immunology
                Vaccination and Immunization
                Vaccine Development
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Immunology
                Vaccination and Immunization
                Vaccine Development
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Preventive Medicine
                Vaccination and Immunization
                Vaccine Development
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Epidemiology
                Pandemics
                Medicine and health sciences
                Medical conditions
                Infectious diseases
                Infectious disease control
                Vaccines
                Viral vaccines
                HIV vaccines
                Biology and life sciences
                Microbiology
                Virology
                Viral vaccines
                HIV vaccines
                Custom metadata
                Study participants were not informed through our consent process that the data from this study would be held in a repository or be made available to the public through publication. Our Institutional Review Board has thus concluded that this would be an unethical use of data and has denied our request to publish the transcripts of this study. However if specific researchers would like to view transcripts they can be made available on a case-by-case basis. We have supplied our codebook as supplement material. Point of contact at our Institutional Review Board is Dr. Sahai Burrowes; 707-638-5837; sburrowe2@ 123456touro.edu .
                COVID-19

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article