Dataset Information

Impact of Vaccine Hesitancy on Onset, Severity and Type of Self-reported Adverse Events: A French Cross-Sectional Survey.

ABSTRACT: Little is known about the impact of mandatory vaccination on people who are reluctant to be vaccinated, despite the potential importance in terms of public health policy. We aimed to explore the relationship between vaccine hesitancy and onset, severity and characteristics of self-reported adverse events. We used a cross-sectional online survey conducted in 2021 among a representative sample of the French population aged 18 years and older (n = 1593). All reported adverse events were analyzed and categorized by trained experts in drug safety and pharmacovigilance. Multivariate binomial regressions on the onset of self-reported adverse events, vaccine hesitancy categories and predefined responders' characteristics were performed. Overall, 590 (37.0%) participants reported at least one adverse event, with 121 (20.5%) considered it to be severe. Proportions of reported adverse events, ranging from 18% (in non-reluctant responders) to 65% (in very reluctant responders), and their severity, ranging from 5% (non-reluctant responders) to 41% (very reluctant responders), depended highly on attitudes toward vaccination. The adverse events profile remained similar between groups. In the multivariate regression model, beyond attitude toward vaccination, younger age and female gender were significantly associated with higher reporting of vaccine adverse events. Our results suggest that vaccine hesitancy could be a major driver of patient-reported vaccine-related adverse events and their perceived severity. In this context, vaccinators must pay special attention to reluctant patients and inform them on the possible nocebo nature of these adverse events so as to prevent them.

SUBMITTER: Khouri C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9379877 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of Vaccine Hesitancy on Onset, Severity and Type of Self-reported Adverse Events: A French Cross-Sectional Survey.

Khouri Charles C Larabi Ayoub A Verger Pierre P Gauna Fatima F Cracowski Jean-Luc JL Ward Jeremy J

Drug safety 20220816 10

<h4>Introduction</h4>Little is known about the impact of mandatory vaccination on people who are reluctant to be vaccinated, despite the potential importance in terms of public health policy.<h4>Objective</h4>We aimed to explore the relationship between vaccine hesitancy and onset, severity and characteristics of self-reported adverse events.<h4>Methods</h4>We used a cross-sectional online survey conducted in 2021 among a representative sample of the French population aged 18 years and older (n ...[more]

PMID: 35972651

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEffective COVID-19 vaccines have been available since early 2021 yet many Americans refuse or delayed uptake. As of mid-2022, still around 30% of US adults remain unvaccinated against COVID-19. The majority (81%) of these unvaccinated adults say they will "definitely not" be getting the COVID-19 vaccine. Understanding the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake is critical to reducing death and illness from the virus, as well as to inform future vaccine efforts, such as the more recent bivalent (omicron) booster.ObjectiveThis study aimed to expand our understanding of psychosocial determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. We focus on both COVID-19-specific factors, such as COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, as well as more global personality attributes such as dogmatism, reactance, gender roles, political beliefs, and religiosity.MethodsWe conducted a web-based survey in mid-2021 of a representative sample of 1376 adults measuring both COVID-19-specific beliefs and attitudes, as well as global personality attributes. COVID-19 vaccination status is reported at 3 levels: vaccinated; unvaccinated-may-get-it; unvaccinated-hard-no.ResultsOur analyses focused on the correlation of COVID-19 vaccination status with 10 psychosocial attributes: COVID-19-specific conspiracy theory beliefs; COVID-19 vaccine misinformation; COVID-19-related Rapture beliefs; general antivaccination beliefs; trait reactance; trait dogmatism; belief in 2020 election fraud; belief in a QAnon conspiracy; health care system distrust; and identification with traditional gender roles. We used a multivariate analysis of covariance to examine mean differences across vaccine status groups for each of the correlates while holding constant the effects of age, gender, race, income, education, political party, and Evangelicalism. Across the 10 psychosocial correlates, several different response scales were used. To allow for comparison of effects across correlates, measures of effect size were computed by converting correlates to z scores and then examining adjusted mean differences in z scores between the groups. We found that all 10 psychosocial variables were significantly associated with vaccination status. After general antivaccination beliefs, COVID-19 misinformation beliefs and COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs had the largest effect on vaccine uptake.ConclusionsThe association of these psychosocial factors with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy may help explain why vaccine uptake has not shifted much among the unvaccinated-hard-no group since vaccines became available. These findings deepen our understanding of those who remain resistant to getting vaccinated and can guide more effective tailored communications to reach them. Health communication professionals may apply lessons learned from countering related beliefs and personality attributes around issues such as climate change and other forms of vaccine hesitancy. For example, using motivational interviewing strategies that are equipped to handle resistance and provide correct information in a delicate manner that avoids reactance.

Project description:BackgroundVaccination rates are still suboptimal in cancer patients. Oncologists play a central role in recommending vaccines to their patients. Our goal was to investigate vaccine acceptance among cancer patients and understand the factors shaping their choices, thereby aiding physicians in better supporting their patients' vaccination decisions.MethodsWe designed a prospective cross-sectional survey exploring vaccination status, attitudes, and reasons for hesitancy towards vaccinations against the main vaccine preventable diseases (VPDs) among patients undergoing active cancer treatment. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the proportion of vaccinated subjects in our cohort of cancer patients. The secondary endpoints were to assess the proportion of vaccinated subjects against different types of VPDs: flu, COVID-19, pneumococcal disease, Herpes Zoster (HZ).ResultsBetween 12 February and 01 March 2024, a total of three hundred and seventeen patients with cancer were invited to respond to the survey, 309 of whom (97%) agreed to do it. Two hundred seventy-three patients (0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.91) had received at least one vaccination. Two hundred thirty-one patients (74.76%) reported that at their first oncology visit their oncologist recommended vaccinations, primarily anti-flu (92.21%) and anti-SARS-CoV-2 (83.55%) vaccinations, while less frequently the anti-pneumococcal (42.42%) and anti-HZ (37%) vaccines were recommended. On the univariate analysis, age over 75 years (p = 0.041), marital status (p = 0.003) and the oncologist's vaccine recommendation during the first visit (p < 0.001) were significantly associated to vaccine acceptance. At the multivariable analysis, these variables were independently associated with vaccine willingness. Overall in our cancer population, the two main reasons for vaccine hesitancy were the lack of recommendation by the oncologist (55.41%, n = 128) and the lack of awareness of the importance of vaccination in the context of oncological care (49.35%, n = 114).ConclusionsThis survey emphasizes the importance of vaccine counseling by the oncologist to their patients. Oncologists can motivate patients to receive the correct vaccine schedule by addressing doubts and concerns about the potential negative impact of the vaccine on cancer and cancer therapies.

Project description:BackgroundVaccine hesitancy has been a growing challenge for public health in recent decades. Among factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy, concerns regarding vaccine safety and Adverse Events (AEs) play the leading role. Moreover, cognitive biases are critical in connecting such concerns to vaccine hesitancy behaviors, but their role has not been comprehensively studied. In this study, our first objective is to address concerns regarding vaccine AEs to increase vaccine acceptance. Our second objective is to identify the potential cognitive biases connecting vaccine hesitancy concerns to vaccine-hesitant behaviors and identify the mechanism they get triggered in the vaccine decision-making process.MethodsFirst, to mitigate concerns regarding AEs, we quantitatively analyzed the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from 2011 to 2018 and provided evidence regarding the non-severity of the AEs that can be used as a communicable summary to increase vaccine acceptance. Second, we focused on the vaccination decision-making process. We reviewed cognitive biases and vaccine hesitancy literature to identify the most potential cognitive biases that affect vaccine hesitancy and categorized them adopting the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM).ResultsOur results show that the top frequent AEs are expected mild reactions like injection site erythema (4.29%), pyrexia (3.66%), and injection site swelling (3.21%). 94.5% of the reports are not serious and the average population-based serious reporting rate over the 8 years was 25.3 reports per 1 million population. We also identified 15 potential cognitive biases that might affect people's vaccination decision-making and nudge them toward vaccine hesitancy. We categorized these biases based on the factors that trigger them and discussed how they contribute to vaccine hesitancy.ConclusionsThis paper provided an evidence-based communicable summary of VAERS. As the most trusted sources of vaccine information, health practitioners can use this summary to provide evidence-based vaccine information to vaccine decision-makers (patients/parents) and mitigate concerns over vaccine safety and AEs. In addition, we identified 15 potential cognitive biases that might affect the vaccination decision-making process and nudge people toward vaccine hesitancy. Any plan, intervention, and message to increase vaccination uptake should be modified to decrease the effect of these potential cognitive biases.

Dataset Information

Impact of Vaccine Hesitancy on Onset, Severity and Type of Self-reported Adverse Events: A French Cross-Sectional Survey.

Publications

Impact of Vaccine Hesitancy on Onset, Severity and Type of Self-reported Adverse Events: A French Cross-Sectional Survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets