RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Understanding national trends in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Canada – April 2020 to March 2021
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.11.10.21266174
DO 10.1101/2021.11.10.21266174
A1 Lavoie, Kim L.
A1 Gosselin-Boucher, Vincent
A1 Stojanovic, Jovana
A1 Gupta, Samir
A1 Gagne, Myriam
A1 Joyal-Desmarais, Keven
A1 Seguin, Katherine
A1 Sheinfield-Gorin, Sherri
A1 Ribeiro, Paula
A1 Voisard, Brigitte
A1 Vallis, Michael
A1 Corace, Kim
A1 Presseau, Justin
A1 Bacon, Simon L.
A1 for the iCARE Study Team
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/11/2021.11.10.21266174.abstract
AB Objective Key to reducing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality and reducing the need for further lockdown measures in Canada and worldwide is widespread acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccine hesitancy has emerged as a key barrier to achieving optimal vaccination rates, for which there is little data among Canadians. This study examined rates of vaccine hesitancy and their correlates among Canadian adults.Methods This study analyzed data from five age, sex and province-weighted population-based samples to describe rates of hesitancy between April 2020 and March 2021 among Canadians who completed online surveys as part of the iCARE Study, and various sociodemographic, clinical and psychological correlates. Vaccine hesitancy was assessed by asking: “If a vaccine for COVID-19 were available today, what is the likelihood that you would get vaccinated?” Responses were dichotomized into ‘very likely’, ‘unlikely’, ‘somewhat unlikely’ (reflecting some degree of vaccine hesitancy) vs ‘extremely likely’ to get the vaccine, which was the comparator.Results Overall, 15,019 respondents participated in the study. A total of 42.2% of respondents reported vaccine hesitancy over the course of the study, which was lowest during surveys 1 (April 2020) and 5 (March 2021) and highest during survey 3 (November 2020). Fully adjusted multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed that women, those aged 50 and younger, non-Whites, those with high school education or less, and those with annual household incomes below the poverty line in Canada (i.e., $60,000) were significantly more likely to report being vaccine hesitant over the study period, as were essential and healthcare workers, parents of children under the age of 18, and those who do not get regular flu vaccines. Believing engaging in infection prevention behaviours (like vaccination) is important for reducing virus transmission and high COVID-19 health concerns (being infected and infecting others) were associated with 77% and 54% reduction in vaccine hesitancy, respectively, and having high personal financial concerns (worried about job or income loss) was associated with 1.33 times increased odds of vaccine hesitancy.Conclusion Results point to the importance of targeting vaccine efforts to women, younger people and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, and that vaccine messaging should emphasize the benefits of getting vaccinated, and how the benefits (particularly to health) far outweigh the risks. Future research is needed to monitor ongoing changes in vaccine intentions and behaviour, as well as to better understand motivators and facilitators of vaccine acceptance, particularly among vulnerable groups.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementiCARE is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR: MM1– 174903; MS3– 173099; SMC-151518), the Canada Research Chairs Program (950– 232522, Chair holder: Dr. Kim L. Lavoie), the Fonds de recherche du Québec –santé (FRQ–S: 251618 and 34757), the Fonds de recherche du Québec – Société et culture (FRQSC: 2019– SE1– 252541), and the Ministèxre de l Économie et de l Innovation du Québec (2020–2022–COVID–19–PSOv2a–51754). Study sponsors had no role in the design of the database and data collection.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The primary REB approval was obtained from the Comité déthique de recherche du Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux du Nord-de-l île-de-Montréal (CIUSSS-NIM), approval # : 2020-2099 / 25-03-2020I 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.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.