Global spatio-temporal distribution of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine hesitancy between 2020 and 2022: A meta-analysis

被引:0
|
作者
Zhao, Tianshuo [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Xu, Qingsong [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Cai, Xianming [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Wang, Mingting [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Ao, Le [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Wei, Tingting [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Yang, Han [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Zhang, Sihui [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Zhang, Xiyu [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Jin, Shifeng [4 ]
Wang, Xinyu [4 ]
Feng, Xin [4 ]
Zhao, Jiayi [4 ]
Wu, Yifei [4 ]
Yang, Jieru [5 ]
Cui, Fuqiang [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Peking Univ, Dept Laboratorial Sci & Technol, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Peking Univ, Vaccine Res Ctr, Sch Publ Hlth, Beijing, Peoples R China
[3] Peking Univ, Ctr Infect Dis & Policy Res, Global Hlth & Infect Dis Grp, Beijing, Peoples R China
[4] Peking Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Beijing, Peoples R China
[5] Peking Univ, Sch Nursing, Beijing, Peoples R China
基金
北京市自然科学基金;
关键词
Vaccine hesitancy; COVID-19; meta analysis; Spatio-temporal distribution; BIAS;
D O I
10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.126933
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Objective: Vaccine hesitancy is a major barrier to high coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine coverage. To synthesize global research on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, a meta-analysis was conducted to provide scientific evidence for understanding its spatial and temporal variations and influencing factors. Methods: We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases for studies published in English between January 2020 and December 2023 and included cross-sectional and cohort studies with study populations that included the general adult population aged >= 18 years and provided quantitative data on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance or hesitancy. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analysis elements and guidance for abstracting and assessing data quality and validity. Two groups of investigators independently extracted the study characteristics, including the outcome variable (the vaccine hesitancy rate). Our meta-analysis used a random-effects model. The outcome of interest was COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The included studies were divided into two categories based on their definitions of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Definition 1 combined vaccination behavior and willingness, and Definition 2 was based solely on willingness to vaccinate. Results: 855 studies were included in the final analytical dataset; 121 met Definition 1, and 734 met Definition 2. There were 277,285,178 participants in the included studies. In studies meeting Definition 1, hesitancy rates increased annually: 18.8 % in 2020, 29.1 % in 2021, and 30.8 % in 2022. However, in studies that met Definition 2, the hesitancy rates remained at 35 %. African studies reported the highest hesitancy rates globally (42.0 %), whereas European studies reported the lowest (16.5 %). Furthermore, there was a temporal association between mortality trends and COVID-19 hesitancy because the monthly cumulative death peaks coincided with lower hesitancy peaks. Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy increased across the continent during 2020-2022 and might be influenced by misinformation, policy changes, and public fatigue. Demographic factors like age, gender, and education also play a key role in vaccine hesitancy. The link between vaccine hesitancy and pandemic severity highlights the need for timely and effective public health responses.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Coronavirus disease 2019 and prevalence of chronic liver disease: A meta-analysis
    Mantovani, Alessandro
    Beatrice, Giorgia
    Dalbeni, Andrea
    LIVER INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 40 (06) : 1316 - 1320
  • [12] Prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms in coronavirus disease 2019: a meta-analysis
    Merola, E.
    Armelao, F.
    de Pretis, G.
    ACTA GASTRO-ENTEROLOGICA BELGICA, 2020, 83 (04) : 603 - 615
  • [13] Epidemiological features of coronavirus disease 2019 in children: a meta-analysis
    Wang, J-G
    Zhong, Z-J
    Mo, Y-F
    Wang, L-C
    Chen, R.
    EUROPEAN REVIEW FOR MEDICAL AND PHARMACOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2021, 25 (02) : 1146 - 1157
  • [14] The spatio-temporal distribution of COVID-19 infection in England between January and June 2020
    Elson, Richard
    Davies, Tilman M.
    Lake, Iain R.
    Vivancos, Roberto
    Blomquist, Paula B.
    Charlett, Andre
    Dabrera, Gavin
    EPIDEMIOLOGY AND INFECTION, 2021, 149
  • [15] Global Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection Requiring Admission to the ICU A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Tan, Elinor
    Song, Jialu
    Deane, Adam M.
    Plummer, Mark P.
    CHEST, 2021, 159 (02) : 524 - 536
  • [16] The Interrelationship between Liver Function Test and the Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Zahedi, Mohammad
    Yousefi, Mohammad
    Abounoori, Mahdi
    Malekan, Mohammad
    Tajik, Fatemeh
    Heydari, Keyvan
    Mortazavi, Parham
    Ghahramani, Sulmaz
    Ghazaeian, Monireh
    Sheydaee, Fateme
    Nasirzadeh, Amirreza
    Alizadeh-Navaei, Reza
    IRANIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2021, 46 (04) : 237 - 255
  • [17] Proportion of asymptomatic coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    He, Jingjing
    Guo, Yifei
    Mao, Richeng
    Zhang, Jiming
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY, 2021, 93 (02) : 820 - 830
  • [18] Asthma in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Shi, Li
    Xu, Jie
    Xiao, Wenwei
    Wang, Ying
    Jin, Yuefei
    Chen, Shuaiyin
    Duan, Guangcai
    Yang, Haiyan
    Wang, Yadong
    ANNALS OF ALLERGY ASTHMA & IMMUNOLOGY, 2021, 126 (05) : 524 - 534
  • [19] Meta-analysis of laboratory results in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019
    Huang, Yun
    Zhang, Yuyu
    Ma, Lili
    EXPERIMENTAL AND THERAPEUTIC MEDICINE, 2021, 21 (05)
  • [20] Effectiveness of corticosteroids to treat coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms: A meta-analysis
    Zeng, Yiqian
    Zeng, Weizhong
    Yang, Bihui
    Liu, Zhao
    MEDICINA CLINICA, 2022, 159 (12): : 575 - 583