4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Defining drivers of under-immunization and vaccine hesitancy in refugee and migrant populations

      review-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

          Background/objective

          Some refugee and migrant populations globally showed lower uptake of COVID-19 vaccines and are also considered to be an under-immunized group for routine vaccinations. These communities may experience a range of barriers to vaccination systems, yet there is a need to better explore drivers of under-immunization and vaccine hesitancy in these mobile groups.

          Methods

          We did a global rapid review to explore drivers of under-immunization and vaccine hesitancy to define strategies to strengthen both COVID-19 and routine vaccination uptake, searching MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health PsycINFO and grey literature. Qualitative data were analysed thematically to identify drivers of under-immunization and vaccine hesitancy, and then categorized using the ‘Increasing Vaccination Model’.

          Results

          Sixty-three papers were included, reporting data on diverse population groups, including refugees, asylum seekers, labour migrants and undocumented migrants in 22 countries. Drivers of under-immunization and vaccine hesitancy pertaining to a wide range of vaccines were covered, including COVID-19 ( n = 27), human papillomavirus (13), measles or Measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) (3), influenza (3), tetanus (1) and vaccination in general. We found a range of factors driving under-immunization and hesitancy in refugee and migrant groups, including unique awareness and access factors that need to be better considered in policy and service delivery. Acceptability of vaccination was often deeply rooted in social and historical context and influenced by personal risk perception.

          Conclusions

          These findings hold direct relevance to current efforts to ensure high levels of global coverage for a range of vaccines and to ensure that marginalized refugee and migrant populations are included in the national vaccination plans of low-, middle- and high-income countries. We found a stark lack of research from low- and middle-income and humanitarian contexts on vaccination in mobile groups. This needs to be urgently rectified if we are to design and deliver effective programmes that ensure high coverage for COVID-19 and routine vaccinations.

          Related collections

          Most cited references93

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

          Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews.

            Reviews of primary research are becoming more common as evidence-based practice gains recognition as the benchmark for care, and the number of, and access to, primary research sources has grown. One of the newer review types is the 'scoping review'. In general, scoping reviews are commonly used for 'reconnaissance' - to clarify working definitions and conceptual boundaries of a topic or field. Scoping reviews are therefore particularly useful when a body of literature has not yet been comprehensively reviewed, or exhibits a complex or heterogeneous nature not amenable to a more precise systematic review of the evidence. While scoping reviews may be conducted to determine the value and probable scope of a full systematic review, they may also be undertaken as exercises in and of themselves to summarize and disseminate research findings, to identify research gaps, and to make recommendations for the future research. This article briefly introduces the reader to scoping reviews, how they are different to systematic reviews, and why they might be conducted. The methodology and guidance for the conduct of systematic scoping reviews outlined below was developed by members of the Joanna Briggs Institute and members of five Joanna Briggs Collaborating Centres.
              Bookmark
              • 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

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Travel Med
                J Travel Med
                jtm
                Journal of Travel Medicine
                Oxford University Press
                1195-1982
                1708-8305
                July 2023
                19 June 2023
                19 June 2023
                : 30
                : 5
                : taad084
                Affiliations
                The Migrant Health Research Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity, St George’s, University of London , London, UK
                Department of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine , London, UK
                The Migrant Health Research Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity, St George’s, University of London , London, UK
                The Migrant Health Research Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity, St George’s, University of London , London, UK
                The Migrant Health Research Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity, St George’s, University of London , London, UK
                The Migrant Health Research Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity, St George’s, University of London , London, UK
                The Health and Migration Programme, World Health Organization , Geneva, Switzerland
                The Health and Migration Programme, World Health Organization , Geneva, Switzerland
                The Health and Migration Programme, World Health Organization , Geneva, Switzerland
                The Health and Migration Programme, World Health Organization , Geneva, Switzerland
                The Health and Migration Programme, World Health Organization , Geneva, Switzerland
                The Migrant Health Research Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity, St George’s, University of London , London, UK
                Author notes
                To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: s.hargreaves@ 123456sgul.ac.uk

                Santino Severoni and Sally Hargreaves Joint senior authors

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0450-7258
                Article
                taad084
                10.1093/jtm/taad084
                10481413
                37335192
                a59001fa-7272-4b62-9869-00dcb077bbb1
                © International Society of Travel Medicine 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 13 April 2023
                : 15 May 2023
                : 29 May 2023
                : 21 July 2023
                Page count
                Pages: 17
                Funding
                Funded by: Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development;
                Funded by: Medical Research Council, DOI 10.13039/501100007155;
                Award ID: MRC/N013638/1
                Funded by: National Institute for Health Research, DOI 10.13039/501100000272;
                Award ID: NIHR300072
                Award ID: NIHR134801
                Funded by: Academy of Medical Sciences, DOI 10.13039/501100000691;
                Award ID: SBF005\1111
                Funded by: La Caixa Foundation;
                Categories
                Editor's Choice
                Review
                AcademicSubjects/MED00295

                vaccination,migrants,covid-19 vaccines,vaccine hesitancy,refugees,vaccine uptake

                Comments

                Comment on this article