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. The COVID-19 pandemic is expected to continue to impose enormous burdens of morbidity and mortality while severely disrupting societies and economies worldwide. Governments must be ready to ensure large-scale, equitable access and distribution of a COVID-19 vaccine if and when a safe and effective one becomes available. This will require sufficient health system capacity, as well as strategies to enhance trust in and acceptance of the vaccine and those who deliver it. In 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization defined vaccine hesitancy as a ' delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services' 1 , which can vary in form and intensity based on when and where it occurs and what vaccine is involved, as has been confirmed in multiple studies 2,3. Concern about vaccine hesitancy is growing worldwide 4 ; in fact, WHO identified it as one of the top ten global health threats in 2019 (https://www.who. int/news-room/spotlight/ten-threats-to-global-health-in-2019). In many countries, vaccine hesitancy and misinformation present substantial obstacles to achieving coverage and community immunity 5,6. Governments, public health officials and advocacy groups must be prepared to address hesitancy and build vaccine literacy so that the public will accept immunization when appropriate. Anti-vaccination activists are already campaigning in multiple countries against the need for a vaccine, with some denying the existence of COVID-19 altogether 7. Misinformation spread through multiple channels could have a considerable effect on the acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine 8. The accelerated pace of vaccine development has further heightened public anxieties and could compromise acceptance 9. Governments and societies must gauge current levels of willingness to receive a potentially safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine and identify correlates of vaccine hesitancy and/or acceptance. We present findings from a survey of the likelihood of vaccine acceptance from a sample of 13,426 respondents in 19 countries.

COVID-19 vaccine is regarded as the most promising means of limiting the spread of or eliminating the pandemic. The success of this strategy will rely on the rate of vaccine acceptance globally. The study aims to examine the factors that influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, intention, and hesitancy. PubMed was searched comprehensively for articles using the keyword “COVID-19 vaccine surveys.” Of the 192 records, 22 studies were eligible for the review. Eighty-two percent of these studies were conducted among the general population. Gender, age, education, and occupation were some of the socio-demographic variables associated with vaccine acceptance. Variables such as trust in authorities, risk perception of COVID-19 infection, vaccine efficacy, current or previous influenza vaccination, and vaccine safety affected vaccine acceptance. Globally, in March 2020, the average vaccine acceptance observed was 86% which dropped to 54% in July 2020 which later increased to 72% in September 2020. Globally, the average rate of vaccine hesitancy in April 2020 was 21%, which increased to 36% in July 2020 and later declined to 16% in October 2020. Large variability in vaccine acceptance and high vaccine hesitancy can influence the efforts to eliminate the COVID-19. Addressing the barriers and facilitators of vaccines will be crucial in implementing effective and tailored interventions to attain maximum vaccine coverage.

OBJECTIVE We estimated the efficacy of a psycho-behavioral intervention in reducing intimate partner violence (IPV) recurrence during pregnancy and postpartum, and in improving birth outcomes in African-American women METHODS We conducted a randomized controlled trial in which 1,044 women were recruited. Individually-tailored counseling sessions were adapted from evidence-based interventions for IPV and other risks. Logistic regression was used to model IPV victimization recurrence, to predict minor, severe, physical and sexual IPV. RESULTS Women randomized to the intervention were less likely to have recurrent episodes of IPV victimization (OR=0.48, 95%CI=0.29-0.80). Women with minor IPV were significantly less likely to experience further episodes during pregnancy (OR=0.48, 95%CI=0.26-0.86, OR=0.53, 95%CI=0.28-0.99) and postpartum (OR=0.56, 95%CI=0.34-0.93). Numbers needed to treat were 17, 12, and 22, respectively as compared to the usual care Women with severe IPV showed significantly reduced episodes at postpartum (OR=0.39, 95%CI=0.18-0.82) and number needed to treat is 27. Women who experienced physical IPV showed significant reduction at the first follow-up (OR=0.49, 95%CI=0.27-0.91) and postpartum (OR=0.47, 95%CI=0.27-0.82) and number needed to treat is 18 and 20, respectively. Intervention women had significantly fewer very preterm infants (p=0.03) and an increased mean gestational age (p=0.016). CONCLUSION A relatively brief intervention during pregnancy had discernable effects on IPV and pregnancy outcomes. Screening for IPV as well as other psychosocial and behavioral risks and incorporating similar interventions in prenatal care is strongly recommended.