COVID-19 加强针的使用率:犹豫不决者是否比不犹豫不决者更不可能接受加强注射?

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Behavioral Medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-18 DOI:10.1080/08964289.2023.2249168
Don E Willis, Ramey Moore, James P Selig, Sheena CarlLee, Morgan P Gurel-Headley, Lawrence E Cornett, Pearl A McElfish
{"title":"COVID-19 加强针的使用率:犹豫不决者是否比不犹豫不决者更不可能接受加强注射?","authors":"Don E Willis, Ramey Moore, James P Selig, Sheena CarlLee, Morgan P Gurel-Headley, Lawrence E Cornett, Pearl A McElfish","doi":"10.1080/08964289.2023.2249168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The main objective of this study was to assess whether hesitancy toward receiving the initial COVID-19 vaccine was associated with uptake of the COVID-19 booster several months after it became available to all US adults. We ask whether hesitancy toward the initial COVID-19 vaccine was significantly associated with lower odds of COVID-19 booster uptake among adults. We test this association within the context of the highly rural state of Arkansas. By January 2022, the US had set a global record of nearly 1 million daily cases. The purpose of this study was to advance our understanding of vaccine hesitancy among those who have already received a dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and how that hesitancy may shape COVID-19 booster uptake. We analyzed data from a random sample survey of Arkansan adults (<i>N</i> = 2,201) between March 1 and March 28, 2022 and constrained our analytical sample to those who had received a vaccine (<i>N</i> = 1,649). Nearly two-thirds of vaccinated Arkansas residents had received a COVID-19 booster. Hesitancy was common even among vaccinated individuals and was significantly associated with reduced odds of COVID-19 booster uptake, even after controlling for other factors. Findings provide further support for conceptualizing vaccine hesitancy as an attitude related to-but separate from-the behavior of vaccination, as opposed to conflating vaccination with being nonhesitant. Public health interventions aimed at increasing COVID-19 booster uptake should pay attention to vaccine hesitancy indicated at the initiation of the series and should not ignore the vaccinated as an important population to target for intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":55395,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11229423/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COVID-19 Booster Uptake: Are Hesitant Adopters Less Likely to Get a Booster Shot Than Nonhesitant Adopters?\",\"authors\":\"Don E Willis, Ramey Moore, James P Selig, Sheena CarlLee, Morgan P Gurel-Headley, Lawrence E Cornett, Pearl A McElfish\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08964289.2023.2249168\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The main objective of this study was to assess whether hesitancy toward receiving the initial COVID-19 vaccine was associated with uptake of the COVID-19 booster several months after it became available to all US adults. We ask whether hesitancy toward the initial COVID-19 vaccine was significantly associated with lower odds of COVID-19 booster uptake among adults. We test this association within the context of the highly rural state of Arkansas. By January 2022, the US had set a global record of nearly 1 million daily cases. The purpose of this study was to advance our understanding of vaccine hesitancy among those who have already received a dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and how that hesitancy may shape COVID-19 booster uptake. We analyzed data from a random sample survey of Arkansan adults (<i>N</i> = 2,201) between March 1 and March 28, 2022 and constrained our analytical sample to those who had received a vaccine (<i>N</i> = 1,649). Nearly two-thirds of vaccinated Arkansas residents had received a COVID-19 booster. Hesitancy was common even among vaccinated individuals and was significantly associated with reduced odds of COVID-19 booster uptake, even after controlling for other factors. Findings provide further support for conceptualizing vaccine hesitancy as an attitude related to-but separate from-the behavior of vaccination, as opposed to conflating vaccination with being nonhesitant. Public health interventions aimed at increasing COVID-19 booster uptake should pay attention to vaccine hesitancy indicated at the initiation of the series and should not ignore the vaccinated as an important population to target for intervention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55395,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioral Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11229423/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioral Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.2023.2249168\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.2023.2249168","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的主要目的是评估对接种 COVID-19 初次疫苗的犹豫不决是否与 COVID-19 强化疫苗向所有美国成年人提供几个月后的接种率有关。我们的问题是,对初次接种 COVID-19 疫苗的犹豫不决是否与成年人接种 COVID-19 加强剂的几率较低有显著关联。我们以阿肯色州这个高度农村化的州为背景,检验了这种关联。截至 2022 年 1 月,美国创下了每天近 100 万例病例的全球记录。本研究的目的是加深我们对已接种过一剂 COVID-19 疫苗的人群的疫苗接种犹豫以及这种犹豫可能如何影响 COVID-19 强化接种率的理解。我们分析了 2022 年 3 月 1 日至 3 月 28 日期间对阿肯色州成年人(N = 2,201 人)进行的随机抽样调查数据,并将分析样本限定为已接种疫苗的人群(N = 1,649 人)。近三分之二接种过疫苗的阿肯色州居民接受过 COVID-19 强化接种。即使在已接种疫苗的人群中,犹豫不决的现象也很普遍,即使在控制了其他因素后,犹豫不决仍与 COVID-19 强化接种几率的降低有显著关系。研究结果进一步支持了将疫苗犹豫概念化,将其视为一种与接种行为相关但又独立的态度,而不是将接种疫苗与不犹豫混为一谈。旨在提高 COVID-19 强化接种率的公共卫生干预措施应关注疫苗接种开始时表现出的疫苗犹豫态度,并且不应忽视已接种疫苗者这一重要的干预目标人群。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19 Booster Uptake: Are Hesitant Adopters Less Likely to Get a Booster Shot Than Nonhesitant Adopters?

The main objective of this study was to assess whether hesitancy toward receiving the initial COVID-19 vaccine was associated with uptake of the COVID-19 booster several months after it became available to all US adults. We ask whether hesitancy toward the initial COVID-19 vaccine was significantly associated with lower odds of COVID-19 booster uptake among adults. We test this association within the context of the highly rural state of Arkansas. By January 2022, the US had set a global record of nearly 1 million daily cases. The purpose of this study was to advance our understanding of vaccine hesitancy among those who have already received a dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and how that hesitancy may shape COVID-19 booster uptake. We analyzed data from a random sample survey of Arkansan adults (N = 2,201) between March 1 and March 28, 2022 and constrained our analytical sample to those who had received a vaccine (N = 1,649). Nearly two-thirds of vaccinated Arkansas residents had received a COVID-19 booster. Hesitancy was common even among vaccinated individuals and was significantly associated with reduced odds of COVID-19 booster uptake, even after controlling for other factors. Findings provide further support for conceptualizing vaccine hesitancy as an attitude related to-but separate from-the behavior of vaccination, as opposed to conflating vaccination with being nonhesitant. Public health interventions aimed at increasing COVID-19 booster uptake should pay attention to vaccine hesitancy indicated at the initiation of the series and should not ignore the vaccinated as an important population to target for intervention.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Behavioral Medicine
Behavioral Medicine 医学-行为科学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
44
审稿时长
>12 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
Associations Between Habit and Its Determinants with Medication Adherence in Chilean Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Randomized Controlled Trial of the Behavioral Intervention for Increasing Physical Activity in Multiple Sclerosis Project: Fidelity Monitoring and Outcomes Sociodemographic Factors, Health-Risk Behaviors, and Chronic Conditions Are Associated with a High Prevalence of Depressive Symptoms: Findings from the Indonesian Family Life Survey-5. The Indirect Effects of Recalled Trauma Severity on Pain Ratings among People with Fibromyalgia: a Moderated Mediation Model. Health Related Quality of Life and Cardiovascular Risk Factors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1