Psychosocial factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK: A prospective cohort study (CoVAccS – Wave 3)

Louise E. Smith; Julius Sim; Megan Cutts; Hannah Dasch; Richard Amlôt; Nick Sevdalis; G. James Rubin; Susan M. Sherman

doi:10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276

Psychosocial factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK: A prospective cohort study (CoVAccS – Wave 3)

Louise E. Smith^*, Julius Sim, Megan Cutts, Hannah Dasch, Richard Amlôt, Nick Sevdalis, G. James Rubin, Susan M. Sherman

^*Corresponding author for this work

UK Health Security Agency

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

47 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: We investigated factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake, future vaccination intentions, and changes in beliefs and attitudes over time.

Methods: Prospective cohort study. 1500 participants completed an online survey in January 2021 (T1, start of vaccine rollout in the UK), of whom 1148 (response rate 76.5 %) completed another survey in October 2021 (T2, all UK adults offered two vaccine doses). Binary logistic regression analysis was used to investigate factors associated with subsequent vaccine uptake. Content analysis was used to investigate the main reasons behind future vaccine intentions (T2). Changes in beliefs and attitudes were investigated using analysis of variance. Findings: At T2, 90.0 % (95 % CI 88.2–91.7 %) of participants had received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, 2.2 % (95 % CI 1.3–3.0 %) had received one dose, and 7.4 % (95 % CI 5.9–8.9 %) had not been vaccinated. Uptake was associated with higher intention to be vaccinated at T1, greater perceived vaccination social norms, necessity of vaccination, and perceived safety of the vaccine. People who had initiated vaccination reported being likely to complete it, while those who had not yet received a vaccine reported being unlikely to be vaccinated in the future. At T2, participants perceived greater susceptibility to, but lower severity of, COVID-19 (p < 0.001) than at T1. Perceived safety and adequacy of vaccine information were higher (p < 0.001).

Interpretation: Targeting modifiable beliefs about the safety and effectiveness of vaccination may increase uptake.

Original language	English
Article number	100276
Journal	Vaccine: X
Volume	13
Early online date	16 Feb 2023
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276
Publication status	Published - Apr 2023

Bibliographical note

Funding Information: Data collection was funded by a Keele University Faculty of Natural Sciences Research Development award to SMS, JS and NS, and a King's COVID Appeal Fund award granted jointly to LS, GJR, RA, NS, SMS and JS. LS, RA and GJR are supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response, a partnership between the UK Health Security Agency, King’s College London and the University of East Anglia. NS’s research is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) South London at King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. NS is a member of King’s Improvement Science, which offers co-funding to the NIHR ARC South London and is funded by King’s Health Partners (Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, King’s College London and South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust), and the Guy’s and St Thomas’ Foundation. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the charities, UK Health Security Agency or the Department of Health and Social Care.
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: NS is the director of the London Safety and Training Solutions Ltd, which offers training in patient safety, implementation solutions and human factors to healthcare organizations and the pharmaceutical industry. At the time of writing GJR is acting as an expert witness in an unrelated case involving a life sciences company, supported by LS. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. LS, RA and GJR were participants of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies or its subgroups.

Open Access: his is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Publisher Copyright: © 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Citation: Louise E. Smith, Julius Sim, Megan Cutts, Hannah Dasch, Richard Amlôt, Nick Sevdalis, G. James Rubin, Susan M. Sherman, Psychosocial factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK: A prospective cohort study (CoVAccS – Wave 3), Vaccine: X, Volume 13, 2023, 100276, ISSN 2590-1362, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276.
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590136223000177)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276

Keywords

Behaviour
COVID-19
Intention
Refusal
Uptake
Vaccination

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276Licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Smith2023PsychosocialFactorsAffectingCOVID-19VaccineUptakeInTheUKVaccineXFinal published version, 457 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{c1f73c4f9f0a4884be18ebc890d03a93,

title = "Psychosocial factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK: A prospective cohort study (CoVAccS – Wave 3)",

abstract = "Background: We investigated factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake, future vaccination intentions, and changes in beliefs and attitudes over time. Methods: Prospective cohort study. 1500 participants completed an online survey in January 2021 (T1, start of vaccine rollout in the UK), of whom 1148 (response rate 76.5 %) completed another survey in October 2021 (T2, all UK adults offered two vaccine doses). Binary logistic regression analysis was used to investigate factors associated with subsequent vaccine uptake. Content analysis was used to investigate the main reasons behind future vaccine intentions (T2). Changes in beliefs and attitudes were investigated using analysis of variance. Findings: At T2, 90.0 % (95 % CI 88.2–91.7 %) of participants had received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, 2.2 % (95 % CI 1.3–3.0 %) had received one dose, and 7.4 % (95 % CI 5.9–8.9 %) had not been vaccinated. Uptake was associated with higher intention to be vaccinated at T1, greater perceived vaccination social norms, necessity of vaccination, and perceived safety of the vaccine. People who had initiated vaccination reported being likely to complete it, while those who had not yet received a vaccine reported being unlikely to be vaccinated in the future. At T2, participants perceived greater susceptibility to, but lower severity of, COVID-19 (p < 0.001) than at T1. Perceived safety and adequacy of vaccine information were higher (p < 0.001). Interpretation: Targeting modifiable beliefs about the safety and effectiveness of vaccination may increase uptake.",

keywords = "Behaviour, COVID-19, Intention, Refusal, Uptake, Vaccination",

author = "Smith, {Louise E.} and Julius Sim and Megan Cutts and Hannah Dasch and Richard Aml{\^o}t and Nick Sevdalis and Rubin, {G. James} and Sherman, {Susan M.}",

note = "Funding Information: Data collection was funded by a Keele University Faculty of Natural Sciences Research Development award to SMS, JS and NS, and a King's COVID Appeal Fund award granted jointly to LS, GJR, RA, NS, SMS and JS. LS, RA and GJR are supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response, a partnership between the UK Health Security Agency, King{\textquoteright}s College London and the University of East Anglia. NS{\textquoteright}s research is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) South London at King{\textquoteright}s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. NS is a member of King{\textquoteright}s Improvement Science, which offers co-funding to the NIHR ARC South London and is funded by King{\textquoteright}s Health Partners (Guy{\textquoteright}s and St Thomas{\textquoteright} NHS Foundation Trust, King{\textquoteright}s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, King{\textquoteright}s College London and South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust), and the Guy{\textquoteright}s and St Thomas{\textquoteright} Foundation. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the charities, UK Health Security Agency or the Department of Health and Social Care. The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: NS is the director of the London Safety and Training Solutions Ltd, which offers training in patient safety, implementation solutions and human factors to healthcare organizations and the pharmaceutical industry. At the time of writing GJR is acting as an expert witness in an unrelated case involving a life sciences company, supported by LS. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. LS, RA and GJR were participants of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies or its subgroups. Open Access: his is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Citation: Louise E. Smith, Julius Sim, Megan Cutts, Hannah Dasch, Richard Aml{\^o}t, Nick Sevdalis, G. James Rubin, Susan M. Sherman, Psychosocial factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK: A prospective cohort study (CoVAccS – Wave 3), Vaccine: X, Volume 13, 2023, 100276, ISSN 2590-1362, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590136223000177) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276",

year = "2023",

month = apr,

doi = "10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276",

language = "English",

volume = "13",

journal = "Vaccine: X",

issn = "2590-1362",

publisher = "Elsevier Ltd.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Psychosocial factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK

T2 - A prospective cohort study (CoVAccS – Wave 3)

AU - Smith, Louise E.

AU - Sim, Julius

AU - Cutts, Megan

AU - Dasch, Hannah

AU - Amlôt, Richard

AU - Sevdalis, Nick

AU - Rubin, G. James

AU - Sherman, Susan M.

N1 - Funding Information: Data collection was funded by a Keele University Faculty of Natural Sciences Research Development award to SMS, JS and NS, and a King's COVID Appeal Fund award granted jointly to LS, GJR, RA, NS, SMS and JS. LS, RA and GJR are supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response, a partnership between the UK Health Security Agency, King’s College London and the University of East Anglia. NS’s research is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) South London at King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. NS is a member of King’s Improvement Science, which offers co-funding to the NIHR ARC South London and is funded by King’s Health Partners (Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, King’s College London and South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust), and the Guy’s and St Thomas’ Foundation. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the charities, UK Health Security Agency or the Department of Health and Social Care. The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: NS is the director of the London Safety and Training Solutions Ltd, which offers training in patient safety, implementation solutions and human factors to healthcare organizations and the pharmaceutical industry. At the time of writing GJR is acting as an expert witness in an unrelated case involving a life sciences company, supported by LS. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. LS, RA and GJR were participants of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies or its subgroups. Open Access: his is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Publisher Copyright: © 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Citation: Louise E. Smith, Julius Sim, Megan Cutts, Hannah Dasch, Richard Amlôt, Nick Sevdalis, G. James Rubin, Susan M. Sherman, Psychosocial factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK: A prospective cohort study (CoVAccS – Wave 3), Vaccine: X, Volume 13, 2023, 100276, ISSN 2590-1362, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590136223000177) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276

PY - 2023/4

Y1 - 2023/4

N2 - Background: We investigated factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake, future vaccination intentions, and changes in beliefs and attitudes over time. Methods: Prospective cohort study. 1500 participants completed an online survey in January 2021 (T1, start of vaccine rollout in the UK), of whom 1148 (response rate 76.5 %) completed another survey in October 2021 (T2, all UK adults offered two vaccine doses). Binary logistic regression analysis was used to investigate factors associated with subsequent vaccine uptake. Content analysis was used to investigate the main reasons behind future vaccine intentions (T2). Changes in beliefs and attitudes were investigated using analysis of variance. Findings: At T2, 90.0 % (95 % CI 88.2–91.7 %) of participants had received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, 2.2 % (95 % CI 1.3–3.0 %) had received one dose, and 7.4 % (95 % CI 5.9–8.9 %) had not been vaccinated. Uptake was associated with higher intention to be vaccinated at T1, greater perceived vaccination social norms, necessity of vaccination, and perceived safety of the vaccine. People who had initiated vaccination reported being likely to complete it, while those who had not yet received a vaccine reported being unlikely to be vaccinated in the future. At T2, participants perceived greater susceptibility to, but lower severity of, COVID-19 (p < 0.001) than at T1. Perceived safety and adequacy of vaccine information were higher (p < 0.001). Interpretation: Targeting modifiable beliefs about the safety and effectiveness of vaccination may increase uptake.

AB - Background: We investigated factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake, future vaccination intentions, and changes in beliefs and attitudes over time. Methods: Prospective cohort study. 1500 participants completed an online survey in January 2021 (T1, start of vaccine rollout in the UK), of whom 1148 (response rate 76.5 %) completed another survey in October 2021 (T2, all UK adults offered two vaccine doses). Binary logistic regression analysis was used to investigate factors associated with subsequent vaccine uptake. Content analysis was used to investigate the main reasons behind future vaccine intentions (T2). Changes in beliefs and attitudes were investigated using analysis of variance. Findings: At T2, 90.0 % (95 % CI 88.2–91.7 %) of participants had received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, 2.2 % (95 % CI 1.3–3.0 %) had received one dose, and 7.4 % (95 % CI 5.9–8.9 %) had not been vaccinated. Uptake was associated with higher intention to be vaccinated at T1, greater perceived vaccination social norms, necessity of vaccination, and perceived safety of the vaccine. People who had initiated vaccination reported being likely to complete it, while those who had not yet received a vaccine reported being unlikely to be vaccinated in the future. At T2, participants perceived greater susceptibility to, but lower severity of, COVID-19 (p < 0.001) than at T1. Perceived safety and adequacy of vaccine information were higher (p < 0.001). Interpretation: Targeting modifiable beliefs about the safety and effectiveness of vaccination may increase uptake.

KW - Behaviour

KW - COVID-19

KW - Intention

KW - Refusal

KW - Uptake

KW - Vaccination

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85150409971&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276

DO - 10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100276

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85150409971

SN - 2590-1362

VL - 13

JO - Vaccine: X

JF - Vaccine: X

M1 - 100276

ER -

Psychosocial factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK: A prospective cohort study (CoVAccS – Wave 3)

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this