12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among medical students in India

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine was launched in India on 16 January 2021, prioritising health care workers which included medical students. We aimed to assess vaccine hesitancy and factors related to it among medical students in India. An online questionnaire was filled by 1068 medical students across 22 states and union territories of India from 2 February to 7 March 2021. Vaccine hesitancy was found among 10.6%. Concern regarding vaccine safety and efficacy, lack of awareness regarding their eligibility for vaccination and lack of trust in government agencies predicted COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among medical students. On the other hand, the presence of risk perception regarding themselves being affected with COVID-19 reduced vaccine hesitancy as well as hesitancy in participating in COVID-19 vaccine trials. Vaccine-hesitant students were more likely to derive information from social media and less likely from teachers at their medical colleges. Choosing between the two available vaccines (Covishield and Covaxin) was considered important by medical students both for themselves and for their future patients. Covishield was preferred to Covaxin by students. Majority of those willing to take the COVID-19 vaccine felt that it was important for them to resume their clinical posting, face-to-face classes and get their personal life back on track. Around three-fourths medical students viewed that COVID-19 vaccine should be made mandatory for both health care workers and international travellers. Prior adult vaccination did not have an effect on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Targeted awareness campaigns, regulatory oversight of vaccine trials and public release of safety and efficacy data and trust building activities could further reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among medical students.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

          Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; p interaction =0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. Funding UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D’Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Attitudes Toward a Potential SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine: A Survey of U.S. Adults

            Once a vaccine for coronavirus disease 2019 becomes available, it will be important to maximize vaccine uptake and coverage. This national survey explores factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. The results suggest that multipronged efforts will be needed to increase acceptance of a coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Social media and vaccine hesitancy

              Background Understanding the threat posed by anti-vaccination efforts on social media is critically important with the forth coming need for world wide COVID-19 vaccination programs. We globally evaluate the effect of social media and online foreign disinformation campaigns on vaccination rates and attitudes towards vaccine safety. Methods Weuse a large-n cross-country regression framework to evaluate the effect ofsocial media on vaccine hesitancy globally. To do so, we operationalize social media usage in two dimensions: the use of it by the public to organize action(using Digital Society Project indicators), and the level of negative lyoriented discourse about vaccines on social media (using a data set of all geocoded tweets in the world from 2018-2019). In addition, we measure the level of foreign-sourced coordinated disinformation operations on social media ineach country (using Digital Society Project indicators). The outcome of vaccine hesitancy is measured in two ways. First, we use polls of what proportion ofthe public per country feels vaccines are unsafe (using Wellcome Global Monitor indicators for 137 countries). Second, we use annual data of actual vaccination rates from the WHO for 166 countries. Results We found the use of social media to organise offline action to be highly predictive of the belief that vaccinations are unsafe, with such beliefs mounting as more organisation occurs on social media. In addition, the prevalence of foreign disinformation is highly statistically and substantively significant in predicting a drop in mean vaccination coverage over time. A 1-point shift upwards in the 5-point disinformation scale is associated with a 2-percentage point drop in mean vaccination coverage year over year. We also found support for the connection of foreign disinformation with negative social media activity about vaccination. The substantive effect of foreign disinformation is to increase the number of negative vaccine tweets by 15% for the median country. Conclusion There is a significant relationship between organisation on social media and public doubts of vaccine safety. In addition, there is a substantial relationship between foreign disinformation campaigns and declining vaccination coverage.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Epidemiol Infect
                Epidemiol Infect
                HYG
                Epidemiology and Infection
                Cambridge University Press (Cambridge, UK )
                0950-2688
                1469-4409
                2021
                20 May 2021
                : 149
                : e132
                Affiliations
                [1 ]All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) , Basni, Jodhpur, 342005, Rajasthan, India
                [2 ]Department of Community Medicine and Family Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) , Basni, Jodhpur, Rajasthan 342005, India
                [3 ]Department of Community Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) , Phulwari Sharif, Patna, Bihar 801507, India
                [4 ]Department of Community Medicine, Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Jaipur National University , Jagatpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302017, India
                Author notes
                Author for correspondence: Suman Saurabh, E-mail: drsumansaurabh@ 123456gmail.com , saurabhs@ 123456aiimsjodhpur.edu.in
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2281-6783
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6156-7903
                Article
                S0950268821001205
                10.1017/S0950268821001205
                8185413
                34011421
                200fc68f-0d43-48d4-83d2-5c2110a897aa
                © The Author(s) 2021

                This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted re-use and analyses in any form or by any means subject to acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic or until permissions are revoked in writing. Upon expiration of these permissions, PMC is granted a perpetual license to make this article available via PMC and Europe PMC, consistent with existing copyright protections.

                History
                : 12 March 2021
                : 11 May 2021
                : 14 May 2021
                Page count
                Tables: 4, References: 31, Pages: 10
                Categories
                Original Paper

                Public health
                covaxin,covid-19,covishield,medical students,vaccine hesitancy
                Public health
                covaxin, covid-19, covishield, medical students, vaccine hesitancy

                Comments

                Comment on this article