Abstract
The paper identifies and quantifies the impact of race, poverty, politics and age on COVID-19 vaccination rates in counties across the continental US. Both traditional Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression analysis and Random Forest machine learning algorithms are applied to quantify contributing factors for county level vaccination hesitancy. With the machine learning model, joint effects of multiple variables (race/ethnicity, partisanship, age etc.) are considered simultaneously to capture the unique combination of what factors affect the vaccination rate. By implementing a state-of-the-art Artificial Intelligence Explanations (AIX) algorithm, it is possible to solve the black box problem with machine learning models and provide answers to the “how much” question for each measured impact factor in every county.
For most counties a higher percentage vote for Republicans, a greater African American population share, and a higher poverty rate lower the vaccination rate. While a higher Asian population share increases the predicted vaccination rate. The impact on the vaccination rate from the Hispanic population proportion is positive in the OLS model, but only positive for counties with very high Hispanic population (65% and more) in the Random Forest model. Both the proportion of seniors and the one for young people in a county have a significant impact in the OLS model — positive and negative, respectively. In contrast, the impacts are ambiguous in the Random Forest model.
Because results vary between geographies and since the AIX algorithm is able to quantify vaccine impacts individually for each county, this research can be tailored to local communities. This way it is a helpful tool for local health officials and other policy makers to improve vaccination rates.
An interactive online mapping dashboard that identifies impact factors for individual U.S. counties is available at https://www.cpp.edu/_clange/vacmap.html. It is apparent that the influence of impact factors is not universally the same across different geographies.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study involves only openly available human data, which can be obtained from: U.S. CENSUS Bureau, CDC, New York Times
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
email: jlange{at}esri.com
Data Availability
All data used in this study are publicly available. Data sources are provided in the paper.
