Adults' views and experiences of vaccines developed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative evidence synthesis

Maria, Ana Rita J; Cooper, Sara; Glenton, Claire; Lewin, Simon; Meskell, Pauline; Suleman, Mehrunisha; Shepperd, Sasha

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd015291

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Distrust has become a pervasive concept in the literature for understanding vaccine hesitancy and what drives it [ 37 , 42 ]. Like others, we have found that a major driver of vaccine hesitancy is people’s distrust in the experts, institutions, or systems implicated with vaccination, including for example scientists, the government, the state-run healthcare system, and the pharmaceutical industry [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 28 ]. This distrust emerged in our research as a significant determinant of vaccine hesitancy for various vaccines, amongst numerous populations and within many settings.…”

Section: Results: Overarching Reflective Insightssupporting

confidence: 63%

“…For example, in our global and regional systematic reviews, we found that hesitancy towards HPV vaccination was uniquely connected to sociocultural norms surrounding adolescence, sexuality, and gender, and the values people attach to different sexual practices and sexualities [ 21 , 24 ]. Relatedly, it emerged from our research globally [ 22 ] and in South Africa [ 28 ] that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was often driven by concerns about the novelty of the vaccine and speed at which it was developed, which are concerns that did not emerge in the case of more routine vaccines that have been around for many years. Similarly, in our global systematic review, we found that the drivers of hesitancy towards routine childhood vaccines were potentially different for parents from higher and lower resource settings [ 20 ].…”

Section: Results: Overarching Reflective Insightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our research has, however, revealed that the so-called ‘supply/access-related’ and ‘demand-related’ dimensions of vaccination are deeply intertwined and often interact in complex ways [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 28 ]. For example, across all our studies, we have found that socioeconomic challenges in accessing vaccination services, such as practical questions of geography and transport, competing priorities, and family economics and household work pressures, often contribute to vaccine hesitancy due to the time, effort, and opportunity costs that accessing vaccination involves.…”

Section: Results: Overarching Reflective Insightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Against this backdrop, over the last decade, we have conducted several qualitative social science studies with the broadly shared aim of understanding vaccine hesitancy better, including what it is, what drives it, and how it might be addressed. Specifically, we have conducted various Cochrane systematic reviews of qualitative research on the nature and drivers of vaccine hesitancy globally for routine childhood vaccines [ 20 ] human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for adolescents [ 21 ], and COVID-19 [ 22 ]. We have also conducted two systematic reviews of qualitative research in Africa, with one focusing on vaccine hesitancy for routine childhood vaccines [ 23 ] and the other on HPV vaccination for adolescents [ 24 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Towards a More Critical Public Health Understanding of Vaccine Hesitancy: Key Insights from a Decade of Research

Cooper

Wiysonge

2023

Vaccines

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vaccine hesitancy has gained renewed attention as an important public health concern worldwide. Against this backdrop, over the last decade, we have conducted various qualitative, social science studies with the broad shared aim of better understanding this complex phenomenon. This has included various Cochrane systematic reviews of qualitative research globally, systematic reviews of qualitative research in Africa, and primary research studies in South Africa. These studies have also explored vaccine hesitancy for various vaccines, including routine childhood vaccination, HPV vaccination and other routine vaccinations for adolescents, and, most recently, COVID-19 vaccination. In this reflective and critical commentary piece we reflect on seven key overarching insights we feel we have gained about this complex phenomenon from the varying studies we have conducted over the past decade. These insights comprise the following: (1) the relationship between vaccine knowledge and hesitancy is complex and may operate in multiple directions; (2) vaccine hesitancy is driven by multiple socio-political forces; (3) vaccine hesitancy may be many things, rather than a single phenomenon; (4) vaccine hesitancy may be an ongoing ‘process’, rather than a fixed ‘stance’; (5) vaccine hesitancy may sometimes be about a ‘striving’, rather than a ‘resisting’; (6) ‘distrust’ as a driver of vaccine hesitancy needs to be better contextualized and disaggregated; and (7) the ‘demand-side’ versus ‘supply/access-side’ distinction of the drivers of suboptimal vaccination may be misleading and unhelpful. In unpacking these insights, we problematize some of the common assumptions within the vaccine hesitancy literature and flag topics that we think could benefit from further scrutiny and debate. Our hope is that this can provide a platform for further engagement on these issues and ultimately contribute towards fostering a more critical public health understanding of vaccine hesitancy.

show abstract

Section: Results: Overarching Reflective Insightssupporting

confidence: 63%

Section: Results: Overarching Reflective Insightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Results: Overarching Reflective Insightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Towards a More Critical Public Health Understanding of Vaccine Hesitancy: Key Insights from a Decade of Research

Cooper

Wiysonge

2023

Vaccines

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From early on in the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccines, along with the wearing of face masks, social distancing, and advice around hand washing, were central public health interventions to control the spread of infection and contribute to achieving herd immunity and reducing the risk of severe illness [1]. During the pandemic, as new vaccines emerged, the WHO authorized a number of vaccines for emergency use globally, including Oxford-AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, Sputnik V, and Sinovac.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptions and Intentions around Uptake of the COVID-19 Vaccination among Older People: A Mixed-Methods Study in Phuket Province, Thailand

Luevanich,

Kane,

Naklong

et al. 2023

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A 70% vaccination rate against COVID-19 in the general population was required for re-opening Phuket tourist industry. However, prior to this research, 39.61% of older people remained unvaccinated. This study aimed to examine perceptions and intentions around COVID-19 vaccination amongst older people and to explore the reasons and factors influencing their decisions to receive or refuse vaccination. Methods: This was a mixed-methods approach with a sequential explanatory design. We conducted an online survey and semi-structured qualitative interview with a subsample. Multinomial logistic regression was applied and thematic content analysis was conducted. Results: 92.4% of participants reported intention to receive the vaccine. Multinomial regression analysis revealed that perceived barriers (AdjOR = 0.032; 95% CI: 0.17–0.59), perceived benefit (AdjOR = 2.65; 95% CI: 1.49–4.71), good health (AdjOR = 3.51; 95% CI: 1.01–12.12) and health not good (AdjOR = 0.10; 95% CI: 0.02–0.49) were predictors of vaccine uptake. In the qualitative interviews, four key influences on up-take for the 28 vaccinated participants were: prevention and protection, convenience, fear of death from COVID-19, and trust in the vaccine. Four key influences on refusal of vaccination in the eight unvaccinated participants were: rarely leaving the house, fear of vaccine side-effects, fear of death after getting the vaccine, and not enough information for decision-making. Conclusion: Intervention and campaigns addressing COVID-19 vaccination should employ strategies, including the widespread use of social and other popular media to increase older people’s perceived benefit of vaccination on their current and future health status, while decreasing perceived barriers to receiving the vaccine.

show abstract

Factors that influence recruitment to COVID-19 vaccine trials: a qualitative evidence synthesis

Biesty,

Sheehan,

Meskell

et al. 2024

Trials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The COVID-19 pandemic marked a unique period characterised by an extraordinary global virus spread. The collective effort to halt the transmission of the virus led to various public health initiatives, including a variety of COVID-19 vaccine trials. Many of these trials used adaptive methods to address the pandemic’s challenges, such as the need for rapid recruitment. These adaptive methods allow for modifications to the trial procedures without undermining the trial’s integrity, making the research process more flexible and efficient. However, recruiting participants for vaccine trials remains a considerable challenge. The aim of this qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) is to explore the factors that influence a person’s decision to participate in a COVID-19 vaccine trial. Lessons learned from this could help shape future trials’ design and conduct, particularly those conducted within a pandemic. Methods We conducted a systematic search for qualitative studies and mixed methods studies with a qualitative component in the WHO COVID-19 Research Database, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Epistemomikos, Online Resource for Research in Clinical Trials (ORCCA), and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register. We used the best-fit framework synthesis approach and the Social Ecological Model as an a priori framework. We used the GRADE-CERQual approach to assess our confidence in the review findings. Results Five studies involving 539 participants were included. One of these studies included participants in a COVID-19 vaccine trial. In three of the studies, participants were asked hypothetically about their attitudes. Another study included people who had either not responded to or declined an invitation to participate in a COVID-19 vaccine trial. We developed six themes outlining the factors that influence a person’s decision to participate in a COVID-19 vaccine trial: (1) personal gains, (2) perceived risk, (3) influence of family and community, (4) contributing for others, (5) institutional trust and mistrust, and (6) accessibility of the trial. Conclusion This review sheds light on how people perceive the potential personal, family, and community advantages of trial participation and how these perceptions may be weighed against concerns about vaccine safety. The findings also point toward specific aspects of trial methodology to consider when designing COVID-19 vaccine trials. Graphical Abstract Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-024-08670-0.

show abstract

Adults' views and experiences of vaccines developed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative evidence synthesis

Abstract: Adults' views and experiences of vaccines developed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative evidence synthesis (Protocol).

Cited by 3 publications

References 47 publications

Towards a More Critical Public Health Understanding of Vaccine Hesitancy: Key Insights from a Decade of Research

Towards a More Critical Public Health Understanding of Vaccine Hesitancy: Key Insights from a Decade of Research

Perceptions and Intentions around Uptake of the COVID-19 Vaccination among Older People: A Mixed-Methods Study in Phuket Province, Thailand

Factors that influence recruitment to COVID-19 vaccine trials: a qualitative evidence synthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About