Tatjana Gazibara, Smiljana Cvjetkovic, Marija Milic, Jelena Dotlic, Natasa Maksimovic, Verica Jovanovic, Vida Jeremic Stojkovic
{"title":"Preferences of COVID-19 Vaccines in the General Population in Belgrade, Serbia: A Qualitative Study.","authors":"Tatjana Gazibara, Smiljana Cvjetkovic, Marija Milic, Jelena Dotlic, Natasa Maksimovic, Verica Jovanovic, Vida Jeremic Stojkovic","doi":"10.1080/08964289.2022.2085652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Few countries provided multiple COVID-19 vaccines for their citizens right from the start of mass immunization. In Serbia, four vaccines were available. Circumstances in which people had several options to choose from are unique. The purpose of this study was to identify motivators behind COVID-19 vaccination and the choice of COVID-19 vaccine among people who were immunized against COVID-19. Qualitative interviews with 35 vaccinated people aged > 18 years were conducted in May 2021 at the Institute of Public Health of Serbia, a reference institution for vaccination. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Four topics emerged: 1) Decision to receive COVID-19 vaccine; 2) Sources of information about the vaccine; 3) Choice of the COVID-19 vaccine and 4) Anti-vaccination sentiment around the vaccinated people. Participants were classified in two groups: those who were determined to receive the vaccine and those who were hesitant. People who were hesitant decided to receive the vaccine after reviewing the information collected from various sources, especially physicians. Although some participants accepted any vaccine regardless of their characteristics, there were others who had explicit preferences. These preferences stemmed mainly from their beliefs about particular vaccine's efficacy and safety, COVID-19 status (previous infection), living or lifestyle circumstances (residence or travel abroad), doctor's recommendation (underlying health status) or trust in expertise of that particular manufacturer's country of origin. Opting for appropriate vaccine was motivated by reasons specific to various individuals, which enabled them to make choices in line with their preferences and values.</p>","PeriodicalId":55395,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.2022.2085652","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Few countries provided multiple COVID-19 vaccines for their citizens right from the start of mass immunization. In Serbia, four vaccines were available. Circumstances in which people had several options to choose from are unique. The purpose of this study was to identify motivators behind COVID-19 vaccination and the choice of COVID-19 vaccine among people who were immunized against COVID-19. Qualitative interviews with 35 vaccinated people aged > 18 years were conducted in May 2021 at the Institute of Public Health of Serbia, a reference institution for vaccination. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Four topics emerged: 1) Decision to receive COVID-19 vaccine; 2) Sources of information about the vaccine; 3) Choice of the COVID-19 vaccine and 4) Anti-vaccination sentiment around the vaccinated people. Participants were classified in two groups: those who were determined to receive the vaccine and those who were hesitant. People who were hesitant decided to receive the vaccine after reviewing the information collected from various sources, especially physicians. Although some participants accepted any vaccine regardless of their characteristics, there were others who had explicit preferences. These preferences stemmed mainly from their beliefs about particular vaccine's efficacy and safety, COVID-19 status (previous infection), living or lifestyle circumstances (residence or travel abroad), doctor's recommendation (underlying health status) or trust in expertise of that particular manufacturer's country of origin. Opting for appropriate vaccine was motivated by reasons specific to various individuals, which enabled them to make choices in line with their preferences and values.
期刊介绍:
Behavioral Medicine is a multidisciplinary peer-reviewed journal, which fosters and promotes the exchange of knowledge and the advancement of theory in the field of behavioral medicine, including but not limited to understandings of disease prevention, health promotion, health disparities, identification of health risk factors, and interventions designed to reduce health risks, ameliorate health disparities, enhancing all aspects of health. The journal seeks to advance knowledge and theory in these domains in all segments of the population and across the lifespan, in local, national, and global contexts, and with an emphasis on the synergies that exist between biological, psychological, psychosocial, and structural factors as they related to these areas of study and across health states.
Behavioral Medicine publishes original empirical studies (experimental and observational research studies, quantitative and qualitative studies, evaluation studies) as well as clinical/case studies. The journal also publishes review articles, which provide systematic evaluations of the literature and propose alternative and innovative theoretical paradigms, as well as brief reports and responses to articles previously published in Behavioral Medicine.