7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Promoting RAPID Vaccine Science Education at the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          ABSTRACT

          At the onset of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, it was clear that we needed to support public education on the science of vaccines. This project was born of that need and led to the development of comprehensive educational materials that addressed the process of science, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 biology, vaccine development, and science communication and outreach. Called the “Online Vaccine Science Resources for COVID-19 Education,” the materials generated were designed to be implemented by educators and community groups in various contexts. They took the form of four modules and general audience informational videos available on a YouTube channel. Each module was assembled as a toolkit with instructional videos, assessments, discussion questions, assignments, synthesis activities, and guides for constructing infographics and dual poster (science and general public audience) presentations. The materials were piloted and tested in various educational settings, including 2-year and 4-year colleges. Data gathered from surveys of faculty and student participants suggested that exposure to the materials promoted student trust in vaccination and the scientific process of vaccine development, and increased the likelihood of their getting a freely available vaccine. Assessment data indicated that the materials were successful in helping students achieve the learning objectives for the modules. Our results underscored the continued need for science education strategies that address the critical problem of vaccine hesitancy as we continue to emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found
          Is Open Access

          Vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants.

          The SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy concluded that vaccine hesitancy refers to delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services. Vaccine hesitancy is complex and context specific, varying across time, place and vaccines. It is influenced by factors such as complacency, convenience and confidence. The Working Group retained the term 'vaccine' rather than 'vaccination' hesitancy, although the latter more correctly implies the broader range of immunization concerns, as vaccine hesitancy is the more commonly used term. While high levels of hesitancy lead to low vaccine demand, low levels of hesitancy do not necessarily mean high vaccine demand. The Vaccine Hesitancy Determinants Matrix displays the factors influencing the behavioral decision to accept, delay or reject some or all vaccines under three categories: contextual, individual and group, and vaccine/vaccination-specific influences.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA

            Widespread acceptance of a vaccine for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) will be the next major step in fighting the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but achieving high uptake will be a challenge and may be impeded by online misinformation. To inform successful vaccination campaigns, we conducted a randomized controlled trial in the UK and the USA to quantify how exposure to online misinformation around COVID-19 vaccines affects intent to vaccinate to protect oneself or others. Here we show that in both countries-as of September 2020-fewer people would 'definitely' take a vaccine than is likely required for herd immunity, and that, relative to factual information, recent misinformation induced a decline in intent of 6.2 percentage points (95th percentile interval 3.9 to 8.5) in the UK and 6.4 percentage points (95th percentile interval 4.0 to 8.8) in the USA among those who stated that they would definitely accept a vaccine. We also find that some sociodemographic groups are differentially impacted by exposure to misinformation. Finally, we show that scientific-sounding misinformation is more strongly associated with declines in vaccination intent.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a representative working-age population in France: a survey experiment based on vaccine characteristics

              Background Opinion polls on vaccination intentions suggest that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is increasing worldwide; however, the usefulness of opinion polls to prepare mass vaccination campaigns for specific new vaccines and to estimate acceptance in a country's population is limited. We therefore aimed to assess the effects of vaccine characteristics, information on herd immunity, and general practitioner (GP) recommendation on vaccine hesitancy in a representative working-age population in France. Methods In this survey experiment, adults aged 18–64 years residing in France, with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, were randomly selected from an online survey research panel in July, 2020, stratified by gender, age, education, household size, and region and area of residence to be representative of the French population. Participants completed an online questionnaire on their background and vaccination behaviour-related variables (including past vaccine compliance, risk factors for severe COVID-19, and COVID-19 perceptions and experience), and were then randomly assigned according to a full factorial design to one of three groups to receive differing information on herd immunity (>50% of adults aged 18–64 years must be immunised [either by vaccination or infection]; >50% of adults must be immunised [either by vaccination or infection]; or no information on herd immunity) and to one of two groups regarding GP recommendation of vaccination (GP recommends vaccination or expresses no opinion). Participants then completed a series of eight discrete choice tasks designed to assess vaccine acceptance or refusal based on hypothetical vaccine characteristics (efficacy [50%, 80%, 90%, or 100%], risk of serious side-effects [1 in 10 000 or 1 in 100 000], location of manufacture [EU, USA, or China], and place of administration [GP practice, local pharmacy, or mass vaccination centre]). Responses were analysed with a two-part model to disentangle outright vaccine refusal (irrespective of vaccine characteristics, defined as opting for no vaccination in all eight tasks) from vaccine hesitancy (acceptance depending on vaccine characteristics). Findings Survey responses were collected from 1942 working-age adults, of whom 560 (28·8%) opted for no vaccination in all eight tasks (outright vaccine refusal) and 1382 (71·2%) did not. In our model, outright vaccine refusal and vaccine hesitancy were both significantly associated with female gender, age (with an inverted U-shaped relationship), lower educational level, poor compliance with recommended vaccinations in the past, and no report of specified chronic conditions (ie, no hypertension [for vaccine hesitancy] or no chronic conditions other than hypertension [for outright vaccine refusal]). Outright vaccine refusal was also associated with a lower perceived severity of COVID-19, whereas vaccine hesitancy was lower when herd immunity benefits were communicated and in working versus non-working individuals, and those with experience of COVID-19 (had symptoms or knew someone with COVID-19). For a mass vaccination campaign involving mass vaccination centres and communication of herd immunity benefits, our model predicted outright vaccine refusal in 29·4% (95% CI 28·6–30·2) of the French working-age population. Predicted hesitancy was highest for vaccines manufactured in China with 50% efficacy and a 1 in 10 000 risk of serious side-effects (vaccine acceptance 27·4% [26·8–28·0]), and lowest for a vaccine manufactured in the EU with 90% efficacy and a 1 in 100 000 risk of serious side-effects (vaccine acceptance 61·3% [60·5–62·1]). Interpretation COVID-19 vaccine acceptance depends on the characteristics of new vaccines and the national vaccination strategy, among various other factors, in the working-age population in France. Funding French Public Health Agency (Santé Publique France).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                J Microbiol Biol Educ
                J Microbiol Biol Educ
                jmbe
                Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
                American Society for Microbiology (1752 N St., N.W., Washington, DC )
                1935-7877
                1935-7885
                1 June 2023
                August 2023
                1 June 2023
                : 24
                : 2
                : e00051-23
                Affiliations
                [a ] Department of Life Sciences, Texas A&M University—San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
                [b ] College Core Curriculum, New York University, New York, New York, USA
                [c ] Department of Biological, Physical and Health Sciences, Roosevelt University, Chicago, Illinois, USA
                [d ] Department of Health, Behavior & Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
                [e ] College of Social Sciences, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa, Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, USA
                [f ] College of Engineering Education, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
                [g ] George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
                [h ] Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California, USA
                [i ] Department of Biology and Biochemistry, Worcester Polytechnic University, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA
                Colorado State University
                Author notes

                The authors declare no conflict of interest.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4049-0337
                Article
                00051-23 jmbe.00051-23
                10.1128/jmbe.00051-23
                10443309
                09008423-da8c-4f8f-ae9b-a18012621765
                Copyright © 2023 Smyth et al.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.

                History
                : 15 March 2023
                : 11 May 2023
                Page count
                supplementary-material: 0, Figures: 0, Tables: 5, Equations: 0, References: 24, Pages: 10, Words: 6077
                Categories
                Curriculum
                jmbe-sci-literacy, Special Series: Scientific Literacy
                Custom metadata
                August 2023

                vaccine,sars-cov-2,scientific literacy,vaccine hesitancy,public education,misinformation,online,science communication

                Comments

                Comment on this article