Dataset Information

Association between Covid-19 sources of information, beliefs, and vaccination rates: an EU-wide survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Misinformation hampers vaccine uptake. The European Union (EU) employed a coordinated effort to curb misinformation during the Covid-19 pandemic. In this context, we investigated relationships between sources of information, vaccine safety/effectiveness, satisfaction with government vaccination strategy, and vaccination intent.

Methods

We used cross-sectional survey data (May 2021) from Flash Eurobarometer 494, a population-adjusted dataset comprised of a representative sample of those ≥15 years from 27 EU nations. We employed a latent class analysis to create clusters of information sources as the independent variable and beliefs in vaccine safety/efficacy, satisfaction with government vaccination strategy, and vaccine intent as four outcome variables. We first estimated the association between source clusters and each of the first three outcomes separately. Then, using these three as intermediate variables, we employed structural equation modeling to estimate the relationship between sources and vaccine intent. We adjusted for individual and country-level variables.

Results

Among 23 012 respondents, four clusters of information sources emerged: (1) national authorities/health professionals (n = 9602; 42%), (2) mostly health professionals (6184; 27%), (3) mixed (n = 1705; 17%) and (4) social media/family/friends (n = 5524; 24%). Using cluster (3) as the referent, we found decreasing odds of beliefs in vaccine safety/effectiveness, satisfaction and vaccine intent across clusters (1), (2) and (4), respectively. Demographics played a role.

Conclusion

In the context of the Covid pandemic, these results provide the first EU-wide estimates of the association between sources of information about vaccine safety/effectiveness, satisfaction and vaccine intent. The coordinated approach promulgated by the EU to minimize misinformation provides a model for managing future pandemics.

SUBMITTER: De la Cruz-Sanchez E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10567234 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association between Covid-19 sources of information, beliefs, and vaccination rates: an EU-wide survey.

De la Cruz-Sánchez Ernesto E Moreno-Llamas Antonio A Mendiola Olivares Jaime J García-Mayor Jesús J Torres-Cantero Alberto A Devine Emily Beth EB

European journal of public health 20231001 5

<h4>Background</h4>Misinformation hampers vaccine uptake. The European Union (EU) employed a coordinated effort to curb misinformation during the Covid-19 pandemic. In this context, we investigated relationships between sources of information, vaccine safety/effectiveness, satisfaction with government vaccination strategy, and vaccination intent.<h4>Methods</h4>We used cross-sectional survey data (May 2021) from Flash Eurobarometer 494, a population-adjusted dataset comprised of a representative ...[more]

PMID: 37459132

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivePublic cooperation to practise preventive health behaviours is essential to manage the transmission of infectious diseases such as COVID-19. We aimed to investigate beliefs about COVID-19 diagnosis, transmission and prevention that have the potential to impact the uptake of recommended public health strategies.DesignAn online cross-sectional survey.ParticipantsA national sample of 1500 Australian adults with representative quotas for age and gender provided by an online panel provider.Main outcome measureProportion of participants with correct/incorrect knowledge of COVID-19 preventive behaviours and reasons for misconceptions.ResultsOf the 1802 potential participants contacted, 289 did not qualify, 13 declined and 1500 participated in the survey (response rate 83%). Most participants correctly identified 'washing your hands regularly with soap and water' (92%) and 'staying at least 1.5 m away from others' (90%) could help prevent COVID-19. Over 40% (incorrectly) considered wearing gloves outside of the home would prevent them from contracting COVID-19. Views about face masks were divided. Only 66% of participants correctly identified that 'regular use of antibiotics' would not prevent COVID-19.Most participants (90%) identified 'fever, fatigue and cough' as indicators of COVID-19. However, 42% of participants thought that being unable to 'hold your breath for 10 s without coughing' was an indicator of having the virus. The most frequently reported sources of COVID-19 information were commercial television channels (56%), the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (43%) and the Australian Government COVID-19 information app (31%).ConclusionsPublic messaging about hand hygiene and physical distancing to prevent transmission appears to have been effective. However, there are clear, identified barriers for many individuals that have the potential to impede uptake or maintenance of these behaviours in the long term. We need to develop public health messages that harness these barriers to improve future cooperation. Ensuring adherence to these interventions is critical.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine vaccination rates, perceptions, and information sources in people with inflammatory arthritis.MethodsParticipants enrolled in the Australian Rheumatology Association Database were invited to participate in an online questionnaire, conducted in January 2020, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Included questions were about vaccination history, modified World Health Organization Vaccination Hesitancy Scale, views of the information sources consulted, the Beliefs About Medicines Questionnaire, education, and the Single-Item Health Literacy Screener.ResultsResponse rate was 994 of 1498 (66%). The median age of participants was 62 years, with 67% female. Self-reported adherence was 83% for the influenza vaccine. Participants generally expressed positive vaccination views, particularly regarding safety, efficacy, and access. However, only 43% knew which vaccines were recommended for them. Vaccine hesitancy was primarily attributable to uncertainty and a perceived lack of information about which vaccines were recommended. Participants consulted multiple vaccination information sources (median 3, interquartile range 2-7). General practitioners (89%) and rheumatologists (76%) were the most frequently used information sources and were most likely to yield positive views. Negative views of vaccination were most often from internet chatrooms, social media, and mainstream media. Factors of younger age, male gender, and having more concerns about the harms and overuse of medicines in general were associated with lower adherence and greater uncertainty about vaccinations, whereas education and self-reported literacy were not.ConclusionParticipants with inflammatory arthritis generally held positive views about vaccination, although there was considerable uncertainty as to which vaccinations were recommended for them. This study highlights the need for improved consumer information about vaccination recommendations for people with inflammatory arthritis.

Project description:ImportanceRandomized clinical trials and observational studies have demonstrated high overall effectiveness for the three US-authorized COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic COVID-19 infection. Nevertheless, the challenges associated with the use of observational data can undermine the results of the studies.ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of using observational data for vaccine effectiveness studies by examining granular weekly effectiveness.Design settings and participantsIn this retrospective cohort study, we used Columbia University Medical Center data linked to State and City Immunization Registries to assess the weekly effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted manual chart review of cases in week one in both groups along with a set of sensitivity analyses for Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Janssen vaccines.Main outcomes and measuresWe used propensity score matching with up to 54,987 covariates and fitted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios and constructed Kaplan-Meier plots for two main outcomes (COVID-19 infection and COVID-19-associated hospitalization).ResultsThe study included 179,666 patients. We observed increasing effectiveness after the first dose of mRNA vaccines with week 6 effectiveness approximating 84% (95% CI 72-91%) for COVID-19 infection and 86% (95% CI 69-95) for COVID-19-associated hospitalization. When analyzing unexpectedly high effectiveness in week one, chart review revealed that vaccinated patients are less likely to seek care after vaccination and are more likely to be diagnosed with COVID-19 during the encounters for other conditions. Sensitivity analyses showed potential outcome misclassification for COVID-19 ICD10-CM diagnosis and the influence of excluding patients with prior COVID-19 infection and anchoring in the unexposed group. Overall vaccine effectiveness analysis in fully vaccinated patients matched the results of the randomized trials.Conclusions and relevanceObservational data can be used to ascertain vaccine effectiveness if potential biases are accounted for. The data need to be scrutinized to ensure that compared groups exhibit similar health seeking behavior and are equally likely to be captured in the data. Given the difference in temporal trends of vaccine exposure and baseline characteristics, indirect comparison of vaccines may produce biased results.Key pointsQuestion: When accounted for all potential biases, what is the weekly effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines?Findings: In this cohort study we replicated the results of randomized clinical trials, discovered plausible increase in effectiveness after week one following the first dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and found differences in temporal trends of vaccine exposure and baseline characteristics in vaccinated groups.Meaning: Observational data can be used to reliably estimate vaccine effectiveness if the biases are accounted for. Vaccines need to be directly compared.

Project description:BackgroundConflicting messages and misleading information related to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic (SARS-CoV-2) have hindered mitigation efforts. It is important that trust in evidence-based public health information be maintained to effectively continue pandemic mitigation strategies. Officials, researchers, and the public can benefit from exploring how people receive information they believe and trust, and how their beliefs influence their behaviors.MethodsTo gain insight and inform effective evidence-based public health messaging, we distributed an anonymous online cross-sectional survey from May to July, 2020 to Virginia residents, 18 years of age or older. Participants were surveyed about their perceptions of COVID-19, risk mitigation behaviors, messages and events they felt influenced their beliefs and behaviors, and where they obtained information that they trust. The survey also collected socio-demographic information, including gender, age, race, ethnicity, level of education, income, employment status, occupation, changes in employment due to the pandemic, political affiliation, sexual orientation, and zip code. Analyses included specific focus on the most effective behavioral measures: wearing a face mask and distancing in public.ResultsAmong 3,488 respondents, systematic differences were observed in information sources that people trust, events that impacted beliefs and behaviors, and how behaviors changed by socio-demographics, political identity, and geography within Virginia. Characteristics significantly associated (p < 0.025) with not wearing a mask in public included identifying as non-Hispanic white, male, Republican political identity, younger age, lower income, not trusting national science and health organizations, believing one or more non-evidence-based messages, and residing in Southwest Virginia in logistic regression. Similar, lesser in magnitude correlations, were observed for distancing in public.ConclusionsThis study describes how information sources considered trustworthy vary across different populations and identities, and how these differentially correspond to beliefs and behaviors. This study can assist decision makers and the public to improve and effectively target public health messaging related to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and future public health challenges in Virginia and similar jurisdictions.

Project description:BackgroundDespite the billions of doses at disposal, less than three-quarters of EU citizens received a COVID-19 vaccine by the end of 2021. The situation is particularly worrying in transition societies, which experience much stronger opposition to vaccination compared to their Western counterparts. To understand whether and to what extent this has to do with the socialist legacy, in this paper we explore wider economic, political, and cultural determinants of the COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the EU.MethodsData from Flash Eurobarometer 494 conducted in May 2021 were used to model the attitudes of EU citizens toward COVID-19 vaccination. Based on their views and intentions, each of 26,106 survey participants was allocated into one of the following categories: (1) already vaccinated/plan to get vaccinated; (2) indecisive; (3) refuse vaccination. Multilevel multinomial logit was employed to understand what underlies the reasoning of each group.ResultsThe survey revealed that 13.4% of Europeans planned to delay vaccination against COVID-19, while 11.2% did not intend to get vaccinated. Although numerous demographic and socio-economic factors jointly shape their viewpoints, it is trust (in the authorities, science, peers, and online social networks above all) that strongly dominates citizens' reasoning. Given that most transition societies are witnessing the pandemic of distrust at various levels, this seemingly unrelated feature appears to be vital in explaining why newer member states record lower vaccination rates. Education was also found to play a pivotal role, which is reflected in an individual's ability to critically assess information from various sources.ConclusionThe study results clearly illustrate how long-lasting structural problems (specific for, but not confined to, transition countries) can manifest themselves in unforeseen circumstances if left unaddressed. It is hence of vital importance to learn the lesson and prevent similar issues in the future. Above all, this would require wide-ranging reforms aiming to repair the imperceptible psychological contract between citizens and the state authorities.

Project description:BackgroundThe success of behavioral interventions and policies designed to reduce the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic depends on how well individuals are informed about both the consequences of infection and the steps that should be taken to reduce the impact of the disease.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate associations between public knowledge about COVID-19, adherence to social distancing, and public trust in government information sources (eg, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), private sources (eg, FOX and CNN), and social networks (eg, Facebook and Twitter) to inform future policies related to critical information distribution.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey (N=1243) between April 10 and 14, 2020. Data collection was stratified by US region and other demographics to ensure representativeness of the sample.ResultsGovernment information sources were the most trusted among the public. However, we observed trends in the data that suggested variations in trust by age and gender. White and older populations generally expressed higher trust in government sources, while non-White and younger populations expressed higher trust in private sources (eg, CNN) and social networks (eg, Twitter). Trust in government sources was positively associated with accurate knowledge about COVID-19 and adherence to social distancing. However, trust in private sources (eg, FOX and CNN) was negatively associated with knowledge about COVID-19. Similarly, trust in social networks (eg, Facebook and Twitter) was negatively associated with both knowledge and adherence to social distancing.ConclusionsDuring pandemics such as the COVID-19 outbreak, policy makers should carefully consider the quality of information disseminated through private sources and social networks. Furthermore, when disseminating urgent health information, a variety of information sources should be used to ensure that diverse populations have timely access to critical knowledge.

Dataset Information

Association between Covid-19 sources of information, beliefs, and vaccination rates: an EU-wide survey.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Association between Covid-19 sources of information, beliefs, and vaccination rates: an EU-wide survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets