skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


  • NSF Public Access
  • Search Results
  • “In the beginning, I said I wouldn't get it.”: Hesitant adoption of the COVID-19 vaccine in remote Alaska between November 2020 and 2021
Title: “In the beginning, I said I wouldn't get it.”: Hesitant adoption of the COVID-19 vaccine in remote Alaska between November 2020 and 2021
Achieving sufficient COVID-19 vaccination coverage has been hindered in many areas by vaccine hesitancy. Many studies based on large survey samples have characterized vaccine refusal, but there are fewer in-depth qualitative studies that explore hesitant adoption: the middle-ground between vaccine acceptance and refusal, and how individuals may move across this continuum depending on their lived experience. For this paper, we use the narratives of 25 adults living in off-road, predominately Alaska Native communities to describe the complex decision-making processes undertaken by ‘hesitant adopters’, defined in our study as those who completed their initial COVID-19 series despite reporting hesitancy. Interviewees' stories help illustrate how hesitant adopters' decision-making processes involved making sense of information through interactions with trusted individuals, lived experiences, observations, emotions, and personal motivations. For the majority of these hesitant adopters' (n = 20, 80%) interpersonal interactions were key in helping to make the decision to get vaccinated. Over half of the interviewees (n = 14, 56%) described how conversations with individuals they trusted, including healthcare providers, family, friends, and interactions through their professional network made them feel safe. One third of the hesitant adopters (n = 7, 28%) attributed their decision to get vaccinated based on the influence of Alaska Native Elders including their knowledge, personal experiences, as well as being motivated by the desire to protect them. Independent research was also important to about a quarter of hesitant adopters (n = 6, 24%), and for these interviewees it was the process of gathering information on their own and learning from others, especially healthcare providers who could answer their questions and alleviate their concerns. This paper illustrates the temporality of vaccine decision-making: vaccine acceptance for those who are hesitant may be an ongoing process that is influenced by personal experience, relationships, and context.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2202820
PAR ID:
10475034
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Science Direct
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Social Science & Medicine
Volume:
334
Issue:
C
ISSN:
0277-9536
Page Range / eLocation ID:
116197
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; (, Journal of Risk Research)
    Wardman, Jamie (Ed.)
    Currently, one of the most pressing public health challenges is encouraging people to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Due to limited supplies, some people have had to wait for the COVID-19 vaccine. Consumer research has suggested that people who are overlooked in initial distribution of desired goods may no longer be interested. Here, we therefore examined people’s preferences for proposed vaccine allocation strategies, as well as their anticipated responses to being overlooked. After health-care workers, most participants preferred prioritizing vaccines for high-risk individuals living in group-settings (49%) or with families (29%). We also found evidence of reluctance if passed over. After random assignment to vaccine allocation strategies that would initially overlook them, 37% of participants indicated that they would refuse the vaccine. The refusal rate rose to 42% when the vaccine allocation strategy prioritized people in areas with more COVID-19 – policies that were implemented in many areas. Even among participants who did not self-identify as vaccine hesitant, 22% said they would not want the vaccine in that case. Logistic regressions confirmed that vaccine refusal would be largest if vaccine allocation strategies targeted people who live in areas with more COVID-19 infections. In sum, once people are overlooked by vaccine allocation, they may no longer want to get vaccinated, even if they were not originally vaccine hesitant. Vaccine allocation strategies that prioritize high-infection areas and high-risk individuals in group-settings may enhance these concerns. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; (, Vaccines)
    Despite their disparate rates of infection and mortality, many communities of color report high levels of vaccine hesitancy. This paper describes racial differences in COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Detroit, and assesses, using a mediation model, how individuals’ personal experiences with COVID-19 and trust in authorities mediate racial disparities in vaccination acceptance. The Detroit Metro Area Communities Study (DMACS) is a panel survey of a representative sample of Detroit residents. There were 1012 respondents in the October 2020 wave, of which 856 (83%) were followed up in June 2021. We model the impact of race and ethnicity on vaccination uptake using multivariable logistic regression, and report mediation through direct experiences with COVID as well as trust in government and in healthcare providers. Within Detroit, only 58% of Non-Hispanic (NH) Black residents were vaccinated, compared to 82% of Non-Hispanic white Detroiters, 50% of Hispanic Detroiters, and 52% of other racial/ethnic groups. Trust in healthcare providers and experiences with friends and family dying from COVID-19 varied significantly by race/ethnicity. The mediation analysis reveals that 23% of the differences in vaccine uptake by race could be eliminated if NH Black Detroiters were to have levels of trust in healthcare providers similar to those among NH white Detroiters. Our analyses suggest that efforts to improve relationships among healthcare providers and NH Black communities in Detroit are critical to overcoming local COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Increased study of and intervention in these communities is critical to building trust and managing widespread health crises. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; (, Preventive Medicine Reports)
    Physicians may have an important role to play in promoting boosters as well as reducing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, but the relationship between hesitancy and trust in the medical profession and these behaviors has been underexplored. A representative online panel of 1,967 US adults that included oversamples of minoritized and rural populations were surveyed in April 2021 and June 2022 regarding their booster and vaccine status and intentions, their views of the medical profession, and their levels of trust in their own doctors, and national and state/local officials. Eighty percent of those vaccinated in 2021 had received a booster by 2022, while fewer than half of those initially reluctant to get a vaccine had gotten one by Wave 2 of the survey. Mean factor scores were calculated for response to a validated scale measuring trust in the medical profession. Linear and logistic regression models estimated the relationship between these factors scores and trust in other officials for those vaccinated as well initial hesitaters/refusers in Wave 1, controlling for population factors. Trust in one’s own physician was associated with those vaccinated/eager to be vaccinated getting a booster, while trust in the medical profession was associated with getting a vaccine among those who had previously refused or were hesitant. Trust in other experts was not significantly associated with these behaviors, but wide confidence intervals suggest a need for future research. Innovative strategies, including mobilizing the medical community is needed to address reluctance, uncertainty, and distrust of therapeutic agents in pandemic response. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; (, Nature Communications)
    Abstract To design effective vaccine policies, policymakers need detailed data about who has been vaccinated, who is holding out, and why. However, existing data in the US are insufficient: reported vaccination rates are often delayed or not granular enough, and surveys of vaccine hesitancy are limited by high-level questions and self-report biases. Here we show how search engine logs and machine learning can help to fill these gaps, using anonymized Bing data from February to August 2021. First, we develop avaccine intent classifierthat accurately detects when a user is seeking the COVID-19 vaccine on Bing. Our classifier demonstrates strong agreement with CDC vaccination rates, while preceding CDC reporting by 1–2 weeks, and estimates more granular ZIP-level rates, revealing local heterogeneity in vaccine seeking. To study vaccine hesitancy, we use our classifier to identify two groups,vaccine early adoptersandvaccine holdouts. We find that holdouts, compared to early adopters matched on covariates, are 67% likelier to click on untrusted news sites, and are much more concerned about vaccine requirements, development, and vaccine myths. Even within holdouts, clusters emerge with different concerns and openness to the vaccine. Finally, we explore the temporal dynamics of vaccine concerns and vaccine seeking, and find that key indicators predict when individuals convert from holding out to seeking the vaccine. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; (, Frontiers in Immunology)
    null (Ed.)
    The arrival of the COVID-19 vaccine has been accompanied by increased discussion of vaccine hesitancy. However, it is unclear if there are shared patterns between general vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 vaccine rejection, or if these are two different concepts. This study characterized rejection of a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine, and compared patterns of association between general vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 vaccine rejection. The survey was conducted online March 20-22, 2020. Participants answered questions on vaccine hesitancy and responded if they would accept the vaccine given different safety and effectiveness profiles. We assessed differences in COVID-19 rejection and general vaccine hesitancy through logistic regressions. Among 713 participants, 33.0% were vaccine hesitant, and 18.4% would reject a COVID-19 vaccine. Acceptance varied by effectiveness profile: 10.2% would reject a 95% effective COVID-19 vaccine, but 32.4% would reject a 50% effective vaccine. Those vaccine hesitant were significantly more likely to reject COVID-19 vaccination [odds ratio (OR): 5.56, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.39, 9.11]. In multivariable logistic regression models, there were similar patterns for vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 vaccine rejection by gender, race/ethnicity, family income, and political affiliation. But the direction of association flipped by urbanicity (P=0.0146, with rural dwellers less likely to be COVID-19 vaccine rejecters but more likely to be vaccine hesitant in general), and age (P=0.0037, with fewer pronounced differences across age for COVID-19 vaccine rejection, but a gradient of stronger vaccine hesitancy in general among younger ages). During the COVID-19 epidemic’s early phase, patterns of vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 vaccine rejection were relatively similar. A significant minority would reject a COVID-19 vaccine, especially one with less-than-ideal effectiveness. Preparations for introducing the COVID-19 vaccine should anticipate substantial hesitation and target concerns, especially among younger adults. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email