Gender differences in the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zintel, Stephanie; Flock, Charlotte; Arbogast, Anna Lisa; Forster, Alice S.; Wagner, Christian von; Sieverding, Monika

doi:10.1007/s10389-021-01677-w

Cited by 151 publications

(113 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Females were 1.65 (95% CI: 1.025–2.656) times more likely to have vaccine hesitancy than males ( Supplementary Table 10 ) and people living in rural areas had higher vaccine hesitancy than those living in urban areas ( Table 5 ). Similar to our results, globally, females have been found to be more vaccine hesitant than males ( 78 ). One possible reason could be that females who were pregnant and lactating were excluded from most COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, and this would not have been reassuring for this subset of women and to those who were trying to get pregnant.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Contrasting Association Between COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Mental Health Status in India and Saudi Arabia—A Preliminary Evidence Collected During the Second Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic

Jayakumar

Ilango²,

K.³

et al. 2022

Front. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundVaccine hesitancy is a global public health threat. Understanding the role of psychological factors in vaccine hesitancy is often neglected and relatively less explored.Aim and ObjectivesTo analyze the relationship between mental health and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy before and after the advent of COVID-19 vaccines (AC19V) in the general population of India and Saudi Arabia (KSA) which vary in severity of the pandemic and vaccine mandates.Materials and MethodsA total of 677 adult participants from India and KSA participated in this cross-sectional online web-based survey. Sociodemographic details and current COVID-19 status pertaining to infection and vaccination were collected. Depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, and perceptive need for mental health support (MHS) were assessed before and after AC19V. A newly constructed and validated COVID19 vaccine hesitancy scale-12 (COVID19-VHS12) scale was used to evaluate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.ResultsPrevalence and levels of depression and anxiety symptoms decreased significantly in Saudis but not in Indians after AC19V. PTSD symptoms showed a significant reduction in both India and KSA. Anxiety symptoms were higher in KSA than India before AC19V while PTSD was higher in India before and after AC19V. Except for the place of residence and employment status, the subgroups of sociodemographic variables which were at higher risk of negative mental health before AC19V showed improvement in their mental health after AC19V. The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in India and KSA was 50.8% (95% CI 45.73–55.89%) and 55.7% (95% CI 50.16–61.31%), respectively. A bidirectional association between vaccine hesitancy and mental health was observed in KSA but not in India. Higher vaccine hesitancy favored higher levels of depression, anxiety, and perceptive need for MHS and vice versa in KSA. None of the mental health parameters predicted vaccine hesitancy in India, while higher vaccine hesitancy increased the risk of anxiety.ConclusionVaccine hesitancy has a negative impact on mental health and vice versa over and above the impact of sociodemographic factors and COVID-19 vaccination and infection status which shows variations between India and KSA.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Contrasting Association Between COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Mental Health Status in India and Saudi Arabia—A Preliminary Evidence Collected During the Second Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic

Jayakumar

Ilango²,

K.³

et al. 2022

Front. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our findings highlight the damaging effect such frames can cause amongst males who generally have higher vaccination intentions compared to females. [70]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When do persuasive messages on vaccine safety steer COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and recommendations? Behavioral insights from a randomised controlled experiment in Malaysia

Hing

Woon

Lee

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionVaccine safety is a primary concern among vaccine hesitant individuals. We examined how seven persuasive messages with different frames, all focusing on vaccine safety, influenced Malaysians to accept the COVID-19 vaccine, and recommend it to individuals with different health and age profiles; i.e. healthy adults, elderly, and people with pre-existing health conditions.MethodsA randomized controlled experiment was conducted among 5,784 Malaysians who were randomly allocated into 14 experimental arms. They were exposed to one or two messages that promoted COVID-19 vaccination. Interventional messages were applied alone or in combination and compared against a control message. Outcome measures were assessed as intent to both take the vaccine and recommend it to healthy adults, elderly, and people with pre-existing health conditions, before and after message exposure. Changes in intent after message exposure were modeled and we estimate the average marginal effects with respect to changes in the predicted probability of selecting a positive intent for all four outcomes.ResultsThe average baseline proportion of participants with positive intents in each arm to take, and recommend the vaccine to healthy adults, elderly, and people with pre-existing health conditions was 61.6%, 84.9%, 72.7% and 51.4% respectively. We found that persuasive communication via several of the experimented messages improved recommendation intent to people with pre-existing health conditions, with improvements ranging between 4 to 8 percentage points. In contrast, none of the messages neither significantly improved vaccination intentions, nor recommendations to healthy adults and the elderly. Instead, we found evidence suggestive of backfiring among this group with messages using negative frames, risky choice frames, and priming descriptive norms.ConclusionPersuasive messages aimed at influencing vaccination decisions should incorporate a combination of factors linked to hesitancy. Messages intended to promote recommendation of novel health interventions to people with pre-existing health conditions should incorporate safety dimensions.Clinical Trials registration numberNCT05244356Key Messages1.What is already known?Persuasive messages have been shown to influence COVID-19 vaccination intentions, but evidence from Low- and Middle-income countries are limited.There are limited studies investigating the effect of persuasive messages in influencing decisions to recommend the COVID-19 vaccine, with only a single study to date which investigated effects directed at recommending the COVID-19 vaccine to a friend, but without considering the individual’s health and age profile.2.What are the new findings?Persuasive messages that focused on vaccine safety did not positively influence Malaysian adults to take the COVID-19 vaccine or recommend it to healthy adults and the elderly, while messages framed as descriptive norms, negative attribute, and risky choices, significantly backfired for some of these outcomes.Several persuasive messages focusing on vaccine safety significantly improved intent to recommend the COVID-19 vaccine to people with pre-existing health conditions.3.What do the new findings imply?Instead of only addressing safety, persuasive messages aimed at nudging vaccination should incorporate multiple behavioral determinants linked to vaccine acceptance.Persuasive messages that are intended to promote uptake of novel health interventions should incorporate safety dimensions as a form of assurance for others to recommend it to people with pre-existing health conditions, given that they may be perceived as more susceptible to hazards from adverse events.

show abstract

“…So zeigen sich deutliche Bewertungsunterschiede zwischen den Geschlechtern, die nahelegen, dass immunsupprimierte Männer mit der bevorstehenden COVID-19-Impfung deutlich weniger haderten: Sie empfanden die COVID-19-Impfung häufiger als sicher, weniger nebenwirkungsbehaftet und hatten seltener ein Problem damit, nicht zwischen unterschiedlichen Impfstoffen auswählen zu können. Diese Tendenz ist nicht neu und konnte kürzlich in einer Metaanalyse bestätigt werden [ 38 ]. Die vorliegende Studie zeigte dabei, dass diese Tendenz sich auch prinzipiell bei Impfwilligen reproduzieren lässt.…”

Section: Diskussionunclassified

Impfeinstellung, Erwartungen und Impferfahrung von Immunsupprimierten bei COVID-19-Impfungen

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Immunsupprimierte sind seltener geimpft, gleichzeitig profitieren sie im Hinblick auf die Nutzen-Risiko-Abschätzung deutlich von vielen Impfungen – auch bei den neuen Impfstoffen gegen SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). Bei der Entscheidung für eine Impfung sind Einstellungen, Erwartungen und Erfahrungen in Bezug auf bisherige Impfungen maßgeblich. Fragestellung Welche Einstellungen haben immunsupprimierte Menschen gegenüber Impfungen allgemein und einer COVID-19 Impfung im Speziellen? Wie haben sie ihre COVID-19-Impfung erlebt? Material und Methoden Im Rahmen der CoCo-Immun-Studie wurden im Frühjahr und Sommer 2021 (11.01.2021–07.11.2021) immunsupprimierte Teilnehmende zu 2 Zeitpunkten zu ihren Erwartungen an eine COVID-19-Impfung und zum Erleben der COVID-19-Impfung mit Fragebögen befragt. Zusätzlich wurden soziodemografische Daten, allgemeine Einstellungen gegenüber Impfungen sowie Erfahrungen mit bisherigen Impfungen erhoben. Die Auswertung erfolgte mittels deskriptiver und bivariater Statistik. Ergebnisse Die 243 Befragten standen Impfungen überwiegend positiv und befürwortend gegenüber und erwarteten eine gute Verträglichkeit und Wirksamkeit. Frauen hatten weniger Vertrauen in die Sicherheit von Impfungen und häufiger Sorgen vor Impfreaktionen und -nebenwirkungen. Ältere Personen fühlten sich zum Zeitpunkt der Impfung besser informiert als jüngere. Personen, die über subjektive Nebenwirkungen bzw. Impfreaktionen bei vorangegangenen Impfungen berichteten, standen Impfungen und staatlichen Institutionen, die sie empfehlen, skeptischer gegenüber. Sie stimmten auch der Aussage „Rückblickend war die COVID-19-Impfung bisher harmlos für mich“ seltener zu. Diskussion Die COVID-19-Impfungen wurden von den befragten Personen überwiegend positiv antizipiert. Die Alters- und Geschlechtsunterschiede in den Zustimmungswerten deuten jedoch darauf hin, dass es unterschiedliche Informationsbedürfnisse gibt, auf die es in Aufklärungsgesprächen und Impfkampagnen einzugehen gilt.

show abstract

Gender differences in the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 151 publications

References 86 publications

Contrasting Association Between COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Mental Health Status in India and Saudi Arabia—A Preliminary Evidence Collected During the Second Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic

Contrasting Association Between COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Mental Health Status in India and Saudi Arabia—A Preliminary Evidence Collected During the Second Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic

When do persuasive messages on vaccine safety steer COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and recommendations? Behavioral insights from a randomised controlled experiment in Malaysia

Impfeinstellung, Erwartungen und Impferfahrung von Immunsupprimierten bei COVID-19-Impfungen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About