Factors Affecting COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance: An International Survey among Low- and Middle-Income Countries

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

Vaccination is fast becoming a key intervention against the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted cross-sectional online surveys to investigate COVID-19 vaccine acceptance across nine Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs; N = 10,183), assuming vaccine effectiveness at 90% and 95%. The prevalence of vaccine acceptance increased from 76.4% (90% effectiveness) to 88.8% (95% effectiveness). Considering a 90% effective vaccine, Malaysia, Thailand, Bangladesh, and five African countries (Democratic Republic of Congo, Benin, Uganda, Malawi, and Mali) had lower acceptance odds compared to Brazil. Individuals who perceived taking the vaccine as important to protect themselves had the highest acceptance odds (aOR 2.49) at 95% effectiveness.Vaccine acceptance was also positively associated with COVID-19 knowledge, worry/fear regarding COVID-19, higher income, younger age, and testing negative for COVID-19. However, chronic disease and female gender reduced the odds for vaccine acceptance. The main reasons underpinning vaccine refusal were fear of side effects (41.2%) and lack of confidence in vaccine effectiveness (15.1%). Further research is needed to identify country-specific reasons for vaccine hesitancy in order to develop mitigation strategies that would ensure high and equitable vaccination coverage across LMICs.

Related collections

Most cited references 48

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine

Jeffrey V Lazarus, Scott C Ratzan, Adam Palayew … (2020)

Several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently in human trials. In June 2020, we surveyed 13,426 people in 19 countries to determine potential acceptance rates and factors influencing acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, and 61.4% reported that they would accept their employer’s recommendation to do so. Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia). Respondents reporting higher levels of trust in information from government sources were more likely to accept a vaccine and take their employer’s advice to do so.

0 comments Cited 1260 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item depression screener.

Kurt Kroenke, Robert L Spitzer, Janet B W Williams (2003)

A number of self-administered questionnaires are available for assessing depression severity, including the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire depression module (PHQ-9). Because even briefer measures might be desirable for use in busy clinical settings or as part of comprehensive health questionnaires, we evaluated a 2-item version of the PHQ depression module, the PHQ-2. The PHQ-2 inquires about the frequency of depressed mood and anhedonia over the past 2 weeks, scoring each as 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). The PHQ-2 was completed by 6000 patients in 8 primary care clinics and 7 obstetrics-gynecology clinics. Construct validity was assessed using the 20-item Short-Form General Health Survey, self-reported sick days and clinic visits, and symptom-related difficulty. Criterion validity was assessed against an independent structured mental health professional (MHP) interview in a sample of 580 patients. As PHQ-2 depression severity increased from 0 to 6, there was a substantial decrease in functional status on all 6 SF-20 subscales. Also, symptom-related difficulty, sick days, and healthcare utilization increased. Using the MHP reinterview as the criterion standard, a PHQ-2 score > or =3 had a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 92% for major depression. Likelihood ratio and receiver operator characteristic analysis identified a PHQ-2 score of 3 as the optimal cutpoint for screening purposes. Results were similar in the primary care and obstetrics-gynecology samples. The construct and criterion validity of the PHQ-2 make it an attractive measure for depression screening.

0 comments Cited 1206 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Anxiety disorders in primary care: prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection.

Kurt Kroenke, Robert L Spitzer, Janet B.W. Williams … (2007)

Anxiety, although as common as depression, has received less attention and is often undetected and undertreated. To determine the current prevalence, impairment, and comorbidity of anxiety disorders in primary care and to evaluate a brief measure for detecting these disorders. Criterion-standard study performed between November 2004 and June 2005. 15 U.S. primary care clinics. 965 randomly sampled patients from consecutive clinic patients who completed a self-report questionnaire and agreed to a follow-up telephone interview. 7-item anxiety measure (Generalized Anxiety Disorder [GAD]-7 scale) in the clinic, followed by a telephone-administered, structured psychiatric interview by a mental health professional who was blinded to the GAD-7 results. Functional status (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-20), depressive and somatic symptoms, and self-reported disability days and physician visits were also assessed. Of the 965 patients, 19.5% (95% CI, 17.0% to 22.1%) had at least 1 anxiety disorder, 8.6% (CI, 6.9% to 10.6%) had posttraumatic stress disorder, 7.6% (CI, 5.9% to 9.4%) had a generalized anxiety disorder, 6.8% (CI, 5.3% to 8.6%) had a panic disorder, and 6.2% (CI, 4.7% to 7.9%) had a social anxiety disorder. Each disorder was associated with substantial impairment that increased significantly (P < 0.001) as the number of anxiety disorders increased. Many patients (41%) with an anxiety disorder reported no current treatment. Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis showed that both the GAD-7 scale and its 2 core items (GAD-2) performed well (area under the curve, 0.80 to 0.91) as screening tools for all 4 anxiety disorders. The study included a nonrandom sample of selected primary care practices. Anxiety disorders are prevalent, disabling, and often untreated in primary care. A 2-item screening test may enhance detection.

0 comments Cited 1017 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Martin H. Bluth: Role: Academic Editor

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Vaccines (Basel)

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Vaccines (Basel)

Journal ID (publisher-id): vaccines

Title: Vaccines

Publisher: MDPI

ISSN (Electronic): 2076-393X

Publication date (Electronic): 17 May 2021

Publication date Collection: May 2021

Volume: 9

Issue: 5

Electronic Location Identifier: 515

Affiliations

[1 ]School of Social Science, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Gelugor 11800, Malaysia; suzanna.bono@ 123456usm.my

[2 ]Disease Control Coordination, São Paulo State Health Department, São Paulo 01246-000, Brazil; edlaine@ 123456alumni.usp.br

[3 ]Institute of Tropical Pathology and Public Health, Federal University of Goiás, Goiânia 74690-900, Brazil

[4 ]Centre for Community Health Studies (ReaCH), Faculty of Health Sciences, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 50300, Malaysia

[5 ]Department of Health Science and Biostatistics, Faculty of Health, Arts and Design, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122, Australia; wchen@ 123456swin.edu.au

[6 ]ASEAN Institute for Health Development, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand; supa.pen@ 123456mahidol.ac.th

[7 ]Public Health Foundation, Bangladesh (PHF, BD), Dhaka 1217, Bangladesh; tasdikhdip@ 123456yahoo.com

[8 ]Department of Primary Care & Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK

[9 ]Research Unit on Communicable Diseases, Polytechnic School of Abomey-Calavi, University of Abomey-Calavi, Cotonou 01 BP 526, Benin; sessouphilippe@ 123456yahoo.fr

[10 ]Kinshasa School of Public Health, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa 7948, Democratic Republic of the Congo; jditekemena@ 123456hotmail.fr

[11 ]Uganda Public Health Fellowship Program, Loudel Towers, Level 4, Kampala, Uganda; bomoda@ 123456musph.ac.ug

[12 ]University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA; mina_hosseinipour@ 123456med.unc.edu

[13 ]University of North Carolina UNC Project Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi

[14 ]International Center of Excellence in Research, Faculty of Medicine and OdontoStomatology, Bamako, Mali; dolohousseini@ 123456yahoo.fr

[15 ]Global Health Institute, University of Antwerp, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium; josephnelson.siewefodjo@ 123456uantwerpen.be (J.N.S.F.); robert.colebunders@ 123456uantwerpen.be (R.C.)

[16 ]Brain Research Africa Initiative (BRAIN), Yaoundé P.O. Box 25625, Cameroon

[17 ]Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia; lowwy@ 123456um.edu.my

[18 ]Asia Europe Institute, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia

Author notes

[* ]Correspondence: chingsin.siau@ 123456ukm.edu.my

[†]

Contributed equally.

Author information

Suzanna Awang Bono https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2143-2622

Edlaine Faria de Moura Villela https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7043-2007

Ching Sin Siau https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7612-6839

Won Sun Chen https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9077-3530

Supa Pengpid https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7714-8869

M Tasdik Hasan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3256-093X

Philippe Sessou https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4154-9211

Bob Omoda Amodan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4561-1337

Joseph Nelson Siewe Fodjo https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3544-1239

Wah Yun Low https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4409-1509

Robert Colebunders https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1919-1340

Article

Publisher ID: vaccines-09-00515

DOI: 10.3390/vaccines9050515

PMC ID: 8157062

PubMed ID: 34067682

SO-VID: b18516ad-348d-4daa-a637-32464500d4f1

License:

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

History

Date received : 26 March 2021

Date accepted : 14 May 2021

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 152

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 1,080

See all reference authors

- Version 1

Factors Affecting COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance: An International Survey among Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 48

A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine

The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item depression screener.

Anxiety disorders in primary care: prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection.

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Author information

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 232

Cited by 152

Most referenced authors 1,080