Monica M Bennett1, Megan Douglas2, Briget da Graca2, Katherine Sanchez2,3, Mark B Powers2,4,5, Ann Marie Warren2,4,5. 1. Baylor Scott & White Research Institute, Dallas, TX, USA. Monica.Bennett@BSWHealth.org. 2. Baylor Scott & White Research Institute, Dallas, TX, USA. 3. School of Social Work, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA. 4. Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. 5. Texas A&M University - College of Medicine, Dallas, TX, USA.
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.
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.
Authors: Kimberly A Fisher; Sarah J Bloomstone; Jeremy Walder; Sybil Crawford; Hassan Fouayzi; Kathleen M Mazor Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2020-09-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Sarah Kreps; Sandip Prasad; John S Brownstein; Yulin Hswen; Brian T Garibaldi; Baobao Zhang; Douglas L Kriner Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-10-01
Authors: Jagdish Khubchandani; Sushil Sharma; James H Price; Michael J Wiblishauser; Manoj Sharma; Fern J Webb Journal: J Community Health Date: 2021-01-03
Authors: Jamie Murphy; Frédérique Vallières; Richard P Bentall; Mark Shevlin; Orla McBride; Todd K Hartman; Ryan McKay; Kate Bennett; Liam Mason; Jilly Gibson-Miller; Liat Levita; Anton P Martinez; Thomas V A Stocks; Thanos Karatzias; Philip Hyland Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Timothy Callaghan; Ali Moghtaderi; Jennifer A Lueck; Peter Hotez; Ulrich Strych; Avi Dor; Erika Franklin Fowler; Matthew Motta Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2020-12-23 Impact factor: 4.634