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

      The influence of anxiety and fear of COVID-19 on vaccination hesitancy among postsecondary students

      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

          The aim of the present study was to explore the influence of anxiety and fear of COVID-19 on vaccination hesitancy among Slovenian postsecondary students. A cross-sectional study using a set of previously tested instruments and ad hoc questions created by the authors was chosen as the method to gain insight into various health and sociodemographic aspects of Slovenian postsecondary students affected by the COVID-19-induced closures and suspensions of educational activities at tertiary educational institutions (N = 5999). Overall, 39.7% of participating students expressed an intention to get vaccinated at the first possible opportunity, whereas 29.2% expressed no intent to do so. The highest vaccine hesitancy was observed among prospective teachers (50.3%) and the lowest among prospective physicians (5,7%). When examining the role of anxiety and fear of COVID-19 on the Slovenian postsecondary students’ intentions to get vaccinated the results of logistic regression showed that only fear of COVID-19 played a mild and significant role.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

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

          A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7.

          Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders; however, there is no brief clinical measure for assessing GAD. The objective of this study was to develop a brief self-report scale to identify probable cases of GAD and evaluate its reliability and validity. A criterion-standard study was performed in 15 primary care clinics in the United States from November 2004 through June 2005. Of a total of 2740 adult patients completing a study questionnaire, 965 patients had a telephone interview with a mental health professional within 1 week. For criterion and construct validity, GAD self-report scale diagnoses were compared with independent diagnoses made by mental health professionals; functional status measures; disability days; and health care use. A 7-item anxiety scale (GAD-7) had good reliability, as well as criterion, construct, factorial, and procedural validity. A cut point was identified that optimized sensitivity (89%) and specificity (82%). Increasing scores on the scale were strongly associated with multiple domains of functional impairment (all 6 Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey scales and disability days). Although GAD and depression symptoms frequently co-occurred, factor analysis confirmed them as distinct dimensions. Moreover, GAD and depression symptoms had differing but independent effects on functional impairment and disability. There was good agreement between self-report and interviewer-administered versions of the scale. The GAD-7 is a valid and efficient tool for screening for GAD and assessing its severity in clinical practice and research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories

            The psychometric properties of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) were evaluated in a normal sample of N = 717 who were also administered the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). The DASS was shown to possess satisfactory psychometric properties, and the factor structure was substantiated both by exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In comparison to the BDI and BAI, the DASS scales showed greater separation in factor loadings. The DASS Anxiety scale correlated 0.81 with the BAI, and the DASS Depression scale correlated 0.74 with the BDI. Factor analyses suggested that the BDI differs from the DASS Depression scale primarily in that the BDI includes items such as weight loss, insomnia, somatic preoccupation and irritability, which fail to discriminate between depression and other affective states. The factor structure of the combined BDI and BAI items was virtually identical to that reported by Beck for a sample of diagnosed depressed and anxious patients, supporting the view that these clinical states are more severe expressions of the same states that may be discerned in normals. Implications of the results for the conceptualisation of depression, anxiety and tension/stress are considered, and the utility of the DASS scales in discriminating between these constructs is discussed.
              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
                branko.gabrovec@nijz.si
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                29 November 2022
                29 November 2022
                2022
                : 12
                : 20564
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.8647.d, ISNI 0000 0004 0637 0731, Faculty of Natural Science and Mathematics, , University of Maribor, ; Koroška Cesta 160, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia
                [2 ]GRID grid.414776.7, National Institute of Public Health, ; Trubarjeva 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3885-1308
                Article
                25221
                10.1038/s41598-022-25221-2
                9707274
                36446831
                afaa3774-01de-4d4f-976d-47b8058e8f43
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 19 May 2022
                : 28 November 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100004895, European Social Fund;
                Award ID: 1303/2013
                Award ID: 1303/2013
                Award ID: 1303/2013
                Award ID: 1303/2013
                Award ID: 1303/2013
                Award ID: 1303/2013
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Uncategorized
                diseases,health care,health occupations,medical research,risk factors,signs and symptoms
                Uncategorized
                diseases, health care, health occupations, medical research, risk factors, signs and symptoms

                Comments

                Comment on this article