4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Attitudes and personal beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccine among people with COVID-19: a mixed-methods analysis

      research-article

      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

          Background

          Little research is available regarding vaccination attitudes among those recently diagnosed with COVID-19. This is important to investigate, particularly among those experiencing mild-to-moderate illness, given the ongoing need to improve uptake of both initial vaccine series and booster doses, and the divergent ways such an experience could impact attitudes.

          Methods

          From September 3 – November 12, 2021, all patients enrolled in Baylor Scott & White’s “COVID-19 Digital Care Journey for Home Monitoring” were invited to participate in an online survey that included questions about vaccination status and attitudes/opinions regarding COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccines. Following an item asking about accordance of COVID-19 vaccination with religious/personal beliefs, participants were asked to describe those beliefs and how they relate to taking/not taking the vaccine.

          Results

          Of 8,075 patients age ≥ 18 years diagnosed with COVID-19 and invited to join the survey during the study period, 3242 (40.2%) were fully vaccinated. In contrast, among the 149 who completed the questionnaire, 95(63.8%) reported full vaccination. Responses differed significantly between vaccination groups. The vaccinated group strongly agreed that COVID-19 is a major public health problem, the vaccines are safe and effective, and their decision to vaccinate included considering community benefit. The unvaccinated group responded neutrally to most questions addressing safety and public health aspects of the vaccine, while strongly disagreeing with statements regarding vaccine effectiveness and other preventative public health measures. The vaccinated group strongly agreed that taking the vaccine accorded with their religious/personal beliefs, while the unvaccinated group was neutral. In qualitative analysis of the free text responses “risk perception/calculation” and “no impact” of religious/personal beliefs on vaccination decisions were frequent themes/subthemes in both groups, but beliefs related to the “greater good” were a strong driver among the vaccinated, while statements emphasizing “individual choice” were a third frequent theme for the unvaccinated.

          Conclusion

          Our results show that two of the three factors that drive vaccine hesitancy (complacency, and lack of confidence in the vaccines) are present among unvaccinated adults recently diagnosed with COVID-19. They also show that beliefs emphasizing the importance of the greater good promote public health participation.

          Supplementary information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-14335-x.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

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

          Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.

          Research electronic data capture (REDCap) is a novel workflow methodology and software solution designed for rapid development and deployment of electronic data capture tools to support clinical and translational research. We present: (1) a brief description of the REDCap metadata-driven software toolset; (2) detail concerning the capture and use of study-related metadata from scientific research teams; (3) measures of impact for REDCap; (4) details concerning a consortium network of domestic and international institutions collaborating on the project; and (5) strengths and limitations of the REDCap system. REDCap is currently supporting 286 translational research projects in a growing collaborative network including 27 active partner institutions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners

            The Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) data management platform was developed in 2004 to address an institutional need at Vanderbilt University, then shared with a limited number of adopting sites beginning in 2006. Given bi-directional benefit in early sharing experiments, we created a broader consortium sharing and support model for any academic, non-profit, or government partner wishing to adopt the software. Our sharing framework and consortium-based support model have evolved over time along with the size of the consortium (currently more than 3200 REDCap partners across 128 countries). While the "REDCap Consortium" model represents only one example of how to build and disseminate a software platform, lessons learned from our approach may assist other research institutions seeking to build and disseminate innovative technologies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Attitudes Toward a Potential SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine: A Survey of U.S. Adults

              Once a vaccine for coronavirus disease 2019 becomes available, it will be important to maximize vaccine uptake and coverage. This national survey explores factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. The results suggest that multipronged efforts will be needed to increase acceptance of a coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Monica.Bennett@BSWHealth.org
                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2458
                18 October 2022
                18 October 2022
                2022
                : 22
                : 1936
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.486749.0, ISNI 0000 0004 4685 2620, Baylor Scott & White Research Institute, ; Dallas, TX USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.411588.1, ISNI 0000 0001 2167 9807, Baylor University Medical Center, ; Dallas, TX USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.267315.4, ISNI 0000 0001 2181 9515, School of Social Work, , University of Texas at Arlington, ; Arlington, TX USA
                [4 ]GRID grid.264756.4, ISNI 0000 0004 4687 2082, Texas A&M University – College of Medicine, ; Dallas, TX USA
                Article
                14335
                10.1186/s12889-022-14335-x
                9579584
                36258176
                6b5bb38d-42c5-44fb-8027-60f681ce5ba5
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 31 May 2022
                : 29 August 2022
                : 12 October 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: W.W. Caruth, Jr. Fund at Communities Foundation of Texas
                Funded by: Baylor Scott & White Dallas Foundation
                Award ID: n/a
                Award ID: n/a
                Award ID: n/a
                Award ID: n/a
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Public health
                covid-19,vaccine,religion,greater good,individual choice
                Public health
                covid-19, vaccine, religion, greater good, individual choice

                Comments

                Comment on this article