For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
4
views
51
references
 Top references
cited by
17
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      732
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Anticipating hopes, fears and expectations towards COVID-19 vaccines: A qualitative interview study in seven European countries

      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

          Vaccine uptake is essential to managing the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and vaccine hesitancy is a persistent concern. At the same time, both decision-makers and the general population have high hopes for COVID-19 vaccination. Drawing from qualitative interview data collected in October 2020 as part of the pan-European SolPan study, this study explores early and anticipatory expectations, hopes and fears regarding COVID-19 vaccination across seven European countries. We find that stances towards COVID-19 vaccines were shaped by personal lived experiences, but participants also aligned personal and communal interests in their considerations. Trust, particularly in expert institutions, was an important prerequisite for vaccine acceptance, but participants also expressed doubts about the rapid vaccine development process. Our findings emphasise the need to move beyond the study of factors driving vaccine hesitancy, and instead to focus on how people personally perceive vaccination in their particular social and political context.

          Related collections

          Most cited references51

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

          Vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants.

          Noni MacDonald (2015)
          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.
          Article 0 comments Cited 2035 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine

            Jeffrey V Lazarus, Scott C Ratzan, Adam Palayew … (2020)
            Several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently in human trials. In June 2020, we surveyed 13,426 people in 19 countries to determine potential acceptance rates and factors influencing acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, and 61.4% reported that they would accept their employer’s recommendation to do so. Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia). Respondents reporting higher levels of trust in information from government sources were more likely to accept a vaccine and take their employer’s advice to do so.
            Article 0 comments Cited 1303 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Vaccine hesitancy: the next challenge in the fight against COVID-19

              Amiel Dror, Netanel Eisenbach, Shahar Taiber … (2020)
              Vaccine hesitancy remains a barrier to full population inoculation against highly infectious diseases. Coincident with the rapid developments of COVID-19 vaccines globally, concerns about the safety of such a vaccine could contribute to vaccine hesitancy. We analyzed 1941 anonymous questionnaires completed by healthcare workers and members of the general Israeli population, regarding acceptance of a potential COVID-19 vaccine. Our results indicate that healthcare staff involved in the care of COVID-19 positive patients, and individuals considering themselves at risk of disease, were more likely to self-report acquiescence to COVID-19 vaccination if and when available. In contrast, parents, nurses, and medical workers not caring for SARS-CoV-2 positive patients expressed higher levels of vaccine hesitancy. Interventional educational campaigns targeted towards populations at risk of vaccine hesitancy are therefore urgently needed to combat misinformation and avoid low inoculation rates.
              Article 0 comments Cited 856 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): SSM Qual Res Health
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): SSM Qual Res Health
                Title: Ssm. Qualitative Research in Health
                Publisher: The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                ISSN (Electronic): 2667-3215
                Publication date PMC-release: 4 January 2022
                Publication date (Electronic): 4 January 2022
                Electronic Location Identifier: 100035
                Affiliations
                [a ]Centre for the Study of Contemporary Solidarity (CeSCoS), Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Austria
                [b ]Institute for History and Ethics in Medicine, Technical University Munich, Germany
                [c ]Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Switzerland
                [d ]Centre for Social Ethics and Policy, Department of Law, School of Social Sciences, The University of Manchester, United Kingdom
                [e ]Ethox Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
                [f ]Ethox Centre and Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
                [g ]MISFIRES Project, College of Business, University College Dublin, Ireland
                [h ]Life Sciences & Society Lab, Centre for Sociological Research (CeSO), KU Leuven, Belgium
                [i ]Department of Medical Biotechnology and Translational Medicine, University of Milan, Italy
                [j ]Department of Experimental Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Italy
                Author notes
                [∗ ]Corresponding author. Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University Munich, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675 Munich, Germany.
                [1]

                These authors contributed equally to this paper and share first authorship.

                Article
                Publisher Item ID: S2667-3215(21)00035-4 Publisher ID: 100035
                DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2021.100035
                PMC ID: 8731673
                PubMed ID: 35013736
                SO-VID: 32c5ce88-ed4e-4d08-8c90-5931c8bb9236
                Copyright © © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                License:

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Date received : 25 June 2021
                Date revision received : 23 November 2021
                Date accepted : 31 December 2021
                Categories
                Subject: Article

                Keywords: sars-cov-2,vaccine hesitancy,europe,pandemic,qualitative research,vaccination policy
                Data availability:
                Keywords: sars-cov-2, vaccine hesitancy, europe, pandemic, qualitative research, vaccination policy

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content732

                See all similar

                Cited by15

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors689

                See all reference authors