METHODS: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was conducted between 4 January and 5 March 2021 in 17 countries worldwide. Proportions and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and vaccine characteristics influencing vaccination acceptance were generated and compared across countries and regions. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.
RESULTS: Of the 19,714 responses received, 90.4% (95% CI 81.8-95.3) reported likely or extremely likely to receive COVID-19 vaccine. A high proportion of likely or extremely likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was reported in Australia (96.4%), China (95.3%) and Norway (95.3%), while a high proportion reported being unlikely or extremely unlikely to receive the vaccine in Japan (34.6%), the U.S. (29.4%) and Iran (27.9%). Males, those with a lower educational level and those of older age expressed a higher level of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Less than two-thirds (59.7%; 95% CI 58.4-61.0) reported only being willing to accept a vaccine with an effectiveness of more than 90%, and 74.5% (95% CI 73.4-75.5) said they would accept a COVID-19 vaccine with minor adverse reactions. A total of 21.0% (95% CI 20.0-22.0) reported not accepting an mRNA vaccine and 51.8% (95% CI 50.3-53.1) reported that they would only accept a COVID-19 vaccine from a specific country-of-origin. Countries from the Southeast Asia region reported the highest proportion of not accepting mRNA technology. The highest proportion from Europe and the Americas would only accept a vaccine produced by certain countries. The foremost important vaccine characteristic influencing vaccine choice is adverse reactions (40.6%; 95% CI 39.3-41.9) of a vaccine and effectiveness threshold (35.1%; 95% CI 33.9-36.4).
CONCLUSIONS: The inter-regional and individual country disparities in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy highlight the importance of designing an efficient plan for the delivery of interventions dynamically tailored to the local population.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study recruited young people aged between 18 and 24 years from the low-income-group communities. A convenience sampling approach was used. Google Surveys were used to gather data from the survey. The questionnaire consisted of an assessment of demographic characteristics, lifestyle factors, parent-youth conflict (Parental Environment Questionnaire, PEQ), resilient coping (Brief Resilient Coping Scale, BRCS), and psychological distress (Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-short form, DASS-21).
RESULTS: A total of 561 complete responses were received. The results showed a low level of parent-child conflict in the overall study population, with a median PEQ of 48.0 [interquartile range (IQR) 36-48]. Higher parent-child conflicts were found in females than in males (OR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.19-2.57) and in youth from households with an income below MYR 2000 than those earning MYR 3,001-5,000 (OR = 4.39, 95% CI 2.40-8.03). A low prevalence of depression (12.5%), anxiety (15.2%), and stress (6.4%) was found. Parent-child conflict remains the strongest significant predictor for higher levels of depression (OR = 10.90, 95% CI 4.31-27.57), anxiety (OR = 11.92, 95% CI 5.05-28.14), and stress (OR = 4.79, 95% CI 1.41-16.33) symptoms. Poor resilient coping was the second strongest predictor for depression and anxiety symptoms. Regarding lifestyle factors, a lower level of physical exercise was associated with higher symptoms of depression. By demographics, females reported more severe symptoms of depression and anxiety than males. Young people from low-income households reported greater severity in symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress than those from high-income households. Young people who are employed also reported greater severity of anxiety symptoms than those who are unemployed.
DISCUSSION: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to have an unpredictable impact on the lives of vulnerable youth in low-income families that warrants attention in future advocacy efforts.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study recruited 553 parents of children aged 13-24 years in low-income community settings. The Parent-Child Conflict scale of the Parental Environment Questionnaire (PEQ) was used to measure parent-child conflict. Psychological distress was assessed using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale short form (DASS-21).
RESULTS: The study revealed a low level of parent-child conflict in the overall study population, with a median PEQ of 48.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 36 to 48). Concerning demographics, married parents reported a likelihood of having a higher level of parent-child conflict over 3 times higher than single parents (OR = 3.18 95%, CI 1.30-7.75). More parent-child conflicts were also found in parents aged 60-72 years old who were unemployed, retired, or housewives and from lower-income groups. In regard to lifestyle factors, a higher level of physical activity and having enough sleep were associated with lower levels of parent-child conflict. Only approximately 1% of the participants reported symptoms of depression, anxiety, or stress.
DISCUSSION: Low risk exists for parent-child conflict and psychological sequelae following the easing of the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, which could be due to various support measures implemented by the government. Vulnerable parents identified as being at risk of parent-child conflict warrant attention in future advocacy efforts.
METHODS: We conducted in-depth virtual interviews with pregnant women between February and April 2022. The interviews were recorded and transcribed, and data were analyzed by content analysis.
RESULTS: The majority of the participants demonstrated a commendable level of awareness regarding the signs and symptoms associated with ZIKV infection. They also exhibited a clear understanding of preventive measures, particularly emphasizing the importance of avoiding mosquito bites to minimize the risk of ZIKV transmission. However, a noteworthy gap in knowledge surfaced as a subset of participants remained uninformed about the potential for sexual transmission of ZIKV, which could lead to congenital ZIKV in pregnant women. Even among women who were cognizant of ZIKV and its potential negative health outcomes, associated with the infection, many of them did not perceive themselves to be at risk, mainly because ZIKV infection is infrequently discussed or heard of, leading to a sense of infections' rarity. While the adoption of preventive measures such as mosquito bite prevention during pregnancy was a common practice, however, prevention of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) including mosquito-borne diseases such as Zika is low. A minority of women express concerns about the sensitivity surrounding discussions and prevention of STIs within the context of marriage. Most of the participants were supportive of the provision of awareness of ZIKV infection in women during pregnancy and the involvement of men, especially in initiatives aimed at preventing transmission through sexual contact.
CONCLUSION: This study uncovered gaps in both knowledge and practices pertaining ZIKV infection among pregnant women in the aftermath of the ZIKV pandemic. The insights gleaned from our research are valuable for shaping future interventions geared towards preventing the resurgence or facilitating the sustainable eradication of ZIKV.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The qualitative software QSR-NVivo 10 was used to manage, code, and analyse the data.
RESULTS: The analyses uncovered several major issues concerning COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The production of the COVID-19 vaccine at an unprecedented speed evoked the fear of skipping steps that would compromise vaccine safety. The unknown long-term effects and duration of protection erode confidence in taking the vaccines. There were also persistent concerns with regard to vaccine compositions that could be harmful or contain aborted foetal cells. The rate of COVID-19 death was viewed as low. Many interpreted the 95% effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine as insufficient. Preference for immunity gains from having an infection was viewed as more effective. Peer-reviewed publication-based data were favoured as a source of trust in vaccination decision-making.
CONCLUSIONS: The anti-COVID-19 vaccine sentiments found in this study provide important insights for the formulation of public health messages to instill confidence in the vaccines.