Using the precaution adoption process model to understand decision-making about the COVID-19 booster vaccine in England

被引:7
|
作者
Meyer, Carly [1 ,5 ]
Goffe, Louis [2 ]
Antonopoulou, Vivi [1 ]
Graham, Fiona [2 ]
Tang, Mei Yee [2 ]
Lecouturier, Jan [2 ]
Grimani, Aikaterini [3 ]
Chadwick, Paul [1 ]
Sniehotta, Falko F. [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] UCL, Dept Clin Educ & Hlth Psychol, NIHR Policy Res Unit Behav Sci, Hlth Psychol Res Grp, London, England
[2] Newcastle Univ, Populat Hlth Sci Inst, Fac Med Sci, NIHR Policy Res Unit Behav Sci, Newcastle upon Tyne, England
[3] Univ Warwick, Warwick Business Sch, NIHR Policy Res Unit Behav Sci, Behav Sci Grp, Coventry, England
[4] Heidelberg Univ, Ctr Prevent Med & Digital Hlth Baden Wuerttemberg, Dept Publ Hlth Prevent & Social Med, Heidelberg, Germany
[5] UCL, Ctr Behav Change, Dept Clin Educ & Hlth Psychol, 1-19 Torrington Pl, London WC1E 7HB, England
关键词
Coronavirus; Vaccine hesitancy; Booster vaccination; Precaution adoption process model; Health belief model; Theory of planned behaviour; UNITED-STATES; HESITANCY; ATTITUDES; INFLUENZA;
D O I
10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.02.047
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Background: COVID-19 continues to pose a threat to public health. Booster vaccine programmes are crit-ical to maintain population-level immunity. Stage theory models of health behaviour can help our under-standing of vaccine decision-making in the context of perceived threats of COVID-19. Purpose: To use the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM) to understand decision-making about the COVID-19 booster vaccine (CBV) in England. Methods: An online, cross-sectional survey informed by the PAPM, the extended Theory of Planned Behaviour and Health Belief Model administered to people over the age of 50 residing in England, UK in October 2021. A multivariate, multinomial logistic regression model was used to examine associations with the different stages of CBV decision-making. Results: Of the total 2,004 participants: 135 (6.7%) were unengaged with the CBV programme; 262 (13.1%) were undecided as to whether to have a CBV; 31 (1.5%) had decided not to have a CBV; 1,415 (70.6%) had decided to have a CBV; and 161 (8.0%) had already had their CBV. Being unengaged was pos-itively associated with beliefs in their immune system to protect against COVID-19, being employed, and low household income; and negatively associated with CBV knowledge, a positive COVID-19 vaccine experience, subjective norms, anticipated regret of not having a CBV, and higher academic qualifications. Being undecided was positively associated with beliefs in their immune system and having previously received the Oxford/AstraZeneca (as opposed to Pfizer/BioNTech) vaccine; and negatively associated with CBV knowledge, positive attitudes regarding CBV, a positive COVID-19 vaccine experience, anticipated regret of not having a CBV, white British ethnicity, and living in East Midlands (vs London). Conclusions: Public health interventions promoting CBV may improve uptake through tailored messaging directed towards the specific decision stage relating to having a COVID-19 booster. (c) 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:2466 / 2475
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A Novel Vaccine Selection Decision-Making Model (VSDMM) for COVID-19
    Abdelwahab, Sayed F.
    Issa, Usama H.
    Ashour, Hossam M.
    VACCINES, 2021, 9 (07)
  • [2] "Black Is Not Monolithic": Complexities in COVID-19 Vaccine Decision-Making
    Wu, Megan
    Havlik, John
    Reese, Kristin
    Felisca, Kathleen
    Loyal, Jaspreet
    JOURNAL OF RACIAL AND ETHNIC HEALTH DISPARITIES, 2025, 12 (02) : 1073 - 1080
  • [3] Understanding the public's decision-making about seasonal flu vaccination during a pandemic: Application of the precaution adoption process model
    Meyer, Carly
    Antonopoulou, Vivi
    Goffe, Louis
    Grimani, Aikaterini
    Graham, Fiona
    Lecouturier, Jan
    Tang, Mei Yee
    Chadwick, Paul
    Sniehotta, Falko F.
    JOURNAL OF HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY, 2024,
  • [4] Using COVID-19 Data on Vaccine Shipments and Wastage to Inform Modeling and Decision-Making
    Hajibabai, Leila
    Hajbabaie, Ali
    Swann, Julie
    Vergano, Dan
    TRANSPORTATION SCIENCE, 2022, 56 (05) : 1135 - 1147
  • [5] Decision-Making in COVID-19 and Frailty
    Moug, Susan
    Carter, Ben
    Myint, Phyo Kyaw
    Hewitt, Jonathan
    McCarthy, Kathryn
    Pearce, Lyndsay
    GERIATRICS, 2020, 5 (02)
  • [6] Factors underlying COVID-19 vaccine and booster hesitancy and refusal, and incentivizing vaccine adoption
    Bennett, Neil G.
    Bloom, David E.
    Ferranna, Maddalena
    PLOS ONE, 2022, 17 (09):
  • [7] Vaccination Double Bind: A Study of Pregnancy and COVID-19 Vaccine Decision-Making
    Campeau, Kari
    RHETORIC SOCIETY QUARTERLY, 2022, 52 (05) : 494 - 509
  • [8] COVID-19 Vaccine Decision-Making Among Black Pregnant and Postpartum Women
    Avorgbedor, Forgive
    Gondwe, Kaboni Whitney
    Aljarrah, Ahmad
    Bankole, Ayomide Okanlawon
    JOURNAL OF RACIAL AND ETHNIC HEALTH DISPARITIES, 2024, 11 (04) : 2073 - 2082
  • [9] COVID-19 vaccine decision-making among pregnant and lactating women in Bangladesh
    Limaye, Rupali J.
    Singh, Prachi
    Paul, Alicia
    Fesshaye, Berhaun
    Lee, Clarice
    Zavala, Eleonor
    Wade, Sydney
    Ali, Hasmot
    Rahman, Hafizur
    Akter, Shirina
    Karron, Ruth
    Siddiqua, Towfida Jahan
    VACCINE, 2023, 41 (26) : 3885 - 3890
  • [10] COVID-19 vaccine decision-making among Black women: A qualitative study
    Mohammed, Inari S.
    Widome, Rachel
    Searle, Kelly M.
    VACCINE, 2023, 41 (40) : 5813 - 5819