| アブストラクト | BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy has been a growing challenge for public health in recent decades. Among factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy, concerns regarding vaccine safety and Adverse Events (AEs) play the leading role. Moreover, cognitive biases are critical in connecting such concerns to vaccine hesitancy behaviors, but their role has not been comprehensively studied. In this study, our first objective is to address concerns regarding vaccine AEs to increase vaccine acceptance. Our second objective is to identify the potential cognitive biases connecting vaccine hesitancy concerns to vaccine-hesitant behaviors and identify the mechanism they get triggered in the vaccine decision-making process. METHODS: First, to mitigate concerns regarding AEs, we quantitatively analyzed the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from 2011 to 2018 and provided evidence regarding the non-severity of the AEs that can be used as a communicable summary to increase vaccine acceptance. Second, we focused on the vaccination decision-making process. We reviewed cognitive biases and vaccine hesitancy literature to identify the most potential cognitive biases that affect vaccine hesitancy and categorized them adopting the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM). RESULTS: Our results show that the top frequent AEs are expected mild reactions like injection site erythema (4.29%), pyrexia (3.66%), and injection site swelling (3.21%). 94.5% of the reports are not serious and the average population-based serious reporting rate over the 8 years was 25.3 reports per 1 million population. We also identified 15 potential cognitive biases that might affect people's vaccination decision-making and nudge them toward vaccine hesitancy. We categorized these biases based on the factors that trigger them and discussed how they contribute to vaccine hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provided an evidence-based communicable summary of VAERS. As the most trusted sources of vaccine information, health practitioners can use this summary to provide evidence-based vaccine information to vaccine decision-makers (patients/parents) and mitigate concerns over vaccine safety and AEs. In addition, we identified 15 potential cognitive biases that might affect the vaccination decision-making process and nudge people toward vaccine hesitancy. Any plan, intervention, and message to increase vaccination uptake should be modified to decrease the effect of these potential cognitive biases. |
|---|
| ジャーナル名 | BMC public health |
|---|
| 投稿日 | 2021/9/18 |
|---|
| 投稿者 | Azarpanah, Hossein; Farhadloo, Mohsen; Vahidov, Rustam; Pilote, Louise |
|---|
| 組織名 | John Molson School of Business, Concordia University, 1450 Guy St, Montreal,;Quebec, H3H 0A1, Canada. hossein.azarpanah@concordia.ca.;Quebec, H3H 0A1, Canada.;Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, McGill University, 5252 De;Maisonneuve Blvd, Montreal, Quebec, H4A 3S5, Canada. |
|---|
| Pubmed リンク | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34530804/ |
|---|
