Kerekes Stefania, Ji Mengdi, Shih Shu-Fang, Chang Hao-Yuan, Harapan Harapan, Rajamoorthy Yogambigai, Singh Awnish, Kanwar Shailja, Wagner Abram L
Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.
Faculty of European Studies, Babeș-Bolyai University of Cluj-Napoca, 400090 Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Sep 11;9(9):1010. doi: 10.3390/vaccines9091010.
Controlling the spread of SARS-CoV-2 will require high vaccination coverage, but acceptance of the vaccine could be impacted by perceptions of vaccine safety and effectiveness. The aim of this study was to characterize how vaccine safety and effectiveness impact acceptance of a vaccine, and whether this impact varied over time or across socioeconomic and demographic groups. Repeated cross-sectional surveys of an opt-in internet sample were conducted in 2020 in the US, mainland China, Taiwan, Malaysia, Indonesia, and India. Individuals were randomized into receiving information about a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine with different safety and effectiveness profiles (risk of fever 5% vs. 20% and vaccine effectiveness 50% vs. 95%). We examined the effect of the vaccine profile on vaccine acceptance in a logistic regression model, and included interaction terms between vaccine profile and socioeconomic/demographic variables to examine the differences in sensitivity to the vaccine profile. In total, 12,915 participants were enrolled in the six-country study, including the US (4054), China (2797), Taiwan (1278), Malaysia (1497), Indonesia (1527), and India (1762). Across time and countries, respondents had stronger preferences for a safer and more effective vaccine. For example, in the US in November 2020, acceptance was 3.10 times higher for a 95% effective vaccine with a 5% risk of fever, vs a vaccine 50% effective, with a 20% risk of fever (95% CI: 2.07, 4.63). Across all countries, there was an increase in the effect of the vaccine profile over time ( < 0.0001), with stronger preferences for a more effective and safer vaccine in November 2020 compared to August 2020. Sensitivity to the vaccine profile was also stronger in August compared to November 2020, in younger age groups, among those with lower income; and in those that are vaccine hesitant. Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines could vary in a country based upon effectiveness and availability. Effective communication tools will need to be developed for certain sensitive groups, including young adults, those with lower income, and those more vaccine hesitant.
控制新冠病毒的传播需要高疫苗接种率，但疫苗的接受度可能会受到对疫苗安全性和有效性认知的影响。本研究的目的是描述疫苗安全性和有效性如何影响疫苗的接受度，以及这种影响是否随时间变化或因社会经济和人口群体而异。2020年在美国、中国大陆、台湾、马来西亚、印度尼西亚和印度对一个自愿参与的网络样本进行了重复横断面调查。个体被随机分组，接收关于一种假设的新冠疫苗的信息，该疫苗具有不同的安全性和有效性特征（发热风险5%对20%，疫苗有效性50%对95%）。我们在逻辑回归模型中研究了疫苗特征对疫苗接受度的影响，并纳入了疫苗特征与社会经济/人口变量之间的交互项，以研究对疫苗特征敏感性的差异。六国研究共纳入12915名参与者，包括美国（4054名）、中国（2797名）、台湾（1278名）、马来西亚（1497名）、印度尼西亚（1527名）和印度（1762名）。在不同时间和国家，受访者对更安全、更有效的疫苗有更强的偏好。例如，在2020年11月的美国，发热风险为5%、有效性为95%的疫苗的接受度，是有效性为50%、发热风险为20%的疫苗的3.10倍（95%置信区间：2.07, 4.63）。在所有国家，随着时间推移，疫苗特征的影响有所增加（P<0.0001），与2020年8月相比, 2020年11月对更有效、更安全疫苗的偏好更强。与2020年11月相比，2020年8月在较年轻年龄组、低收入者以及对疫苗持犹豫态度者中对疫苗特征的敏感性也更强。基于有效性和可及性，新冠疫苗在一个国家的接种率可能会有所不同。需要为某些敏感群体开发有效的沟通工具，包括年轻人、低收入者以及对疫苗更持犹豫态度者。
