Purpose To determine reasons for hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccination and motivators to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake among Black Americans. Design Mixed-methods. Setting Individual interviews in March-April 2021 Participants Black adults (20-79 years) who attended a church in Boston, MA and identified as “vaccine hesitant” (n = 18). Methods Individual in-depth Zoom interviews to elicit participant views on vaccines in general, specific reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, and trusted sources of information. Participants were also asked about possible motivators that could increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Transcripts were de-identified and analyzed for major themes using an inductive approach. Results Analysis included 18 complete interviews. Lack of trust in the government, healthcare, or pharmaceutical companies (n = 18), rushed development (n = 14), fear of side effects (n = 12), history of medical mistreatment (n = 12), and a perception of low risk of disease (n = 9) were the top-cited reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Motivators likely to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake included more data (n = 17), friends and family getting vaccinated (not celebrities) (n = 11), and increased opportunities that come along with being vaccinated (n = 8). Conclusion There were many reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, as reported by participants who were all Black Americans in the Boston area. The public health challenge of increasing vaccine uptake in the Black community is nuanced and intervention efforts may be more successful if delivered by trusted members of the community and tailored to the needs of individuals.

Patients with disabilities receive fewer health services than the general population, yet they have greater health needs. Similarly, physicians report limited training in disability. The current project examines medical students' learning about disability in a project using individuals with disabilities as medical educators. Family medicine clerkship students (N = 138) across an academic year were videotaped during interviews with standardized patient educators with disabilities and during feedback sessions following the interactions. Qualitative analysis of feedback transcripts identifies three primary areas of integrating learning, reflective practice, and disability: (1) learning how disability impacts the treatment plan, (2) self-reflection and recognizing attitudes about disability, and (3) learning about the practice of medicine generally from the disability exercise. Themes are identified within each of the primary learning areas. Medical student reflection provides evidence of learning to connect disability with pain, everyday life, and treatment. Medical students learned to recognize patients' expertise in their own condition and in health care navigation. Medical students also examined how their language implies attitude. The current investigation provided evidence of the ways examining disability can serve as a cornerstone for building relationship-centered patient care and encouraging reflective practice overall.

No abstract available.

Medical student behaviors were examined through digital recordings of interpersonal skills communication training framed around a brief curriculum on disability within a family medicine clerkship. This analysis focuses on interpersonal communication processes and ways medical students ask standardized patient educators about visually apparent disability (N = 142). Primary themes of asking about or avoiding disability were identified with regard to language and nonverbal communication in how medical students asked and whether they integrated chronic disability with new musculoskeletal pain complaints. Secondary themes related to timing and communication further contextualized the primary themes. Seventy-four percent of students asked about the disability. Analysis of feedback sessions immediately following the interactions revealed that more than half the students who did not ask about disability spontaneously recognized that they avoided disability language. Results suggest that some ways of asking about disability may inhibit patient disclosure and restrict relationship building. In particular, asking about disability, but then avoiding integrating disability disclosure into the treatment plan, or responding to disability-related disclosure with overly positive, infantilizing-type communication, may pose more difficult dilemmas than never asking about the disability. On the contrary, students who ignored disability altogether often also recognized they missed disability cues, thus providing a learning experience of considerable value. Underlying student attitudes and possibilities for integrating biomedical concerns with social-psychological impacts of disability are addressed.

Background and Objectives: Despite substantial health benefits and prolific research efforts to demonstrate safety and increase uptake, vaccine hesitancy has increased dramatically. This study aimed to systematically analyze available literature on vaccine hesitancy in the United States and determine the rationale behind vaccine-hesitant parents and potential interventions. Methods: We conducted a literature search and identified 232 articles; we included 90 after screening. We pulled information from each article using standardized questions for “type of study,” “population,” “specific vaccine,” “reasons for hesitancy,” “hesitancy prevalence,” “attempt at change,” “results of intervention,” and “future interventions.” We created recurrent themes from the data and analyzed these themes via descriptive statistics. Results: Vaccine safety was the most commonly identified reason for vaccine hesitancy amongst studies (50%), followed by not enough information (30%), side effects (26%), low risk of disease (26%), social norms (22%), vaccine schedule (21%), not recommended by doctor (21%), efficacy (18%), cost/access (13%), sexual concerns (12%) and distrust of establishment (7%). Only 20% of papers documented an intervention, and <50% of these reported increased vaccination rates or intent. More research was the most commonly identified next step (49%). Conclusions: Despite large amounts of research on vaccination rates, patients are still reporting not enough information and safety as the most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Interventions were few and without promising results. More research was the most suggested intervention. Such research must address concerns of the vaccine-hesitant community, comparing risks and benefits of each vaccination in a longitudinal, coherent, and transparently unbiased fashion.