Naseem Parsa, Mark Dworkin, Caesar Thompson, Cornelius Chandler, SangEun Lee, Aram Kang, Diana Ghebenei, Melissa Martin, Nadine Peacock, Jeni Hebert-Beirne, Emily Stiehl
{"title":"Informing Vaccine Messaging and Community Outreach: Experience in Chicago with a Community-Based Participatory Approach.","authors":"Naseem Parsa, Mark Dworkin, Caesar Thompson, Cornelius Chandler, SangEun Lee, Aram Kang, Diana Ghebenei, Melissa Martin, Nadine Peacock, Jeni Hebert-Beirne, Emily Stiehl","doi":"10.1177/08901171241307435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>PurposeIn response to disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake in urban environments, we ascertained whether a community-engaged evaluation could rapidly determine why unvaccinated Chicago residents were hesitant to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.ApproachThe assessment used a mixed-methods approach, grounded in community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles.SettingInterviews were conducted by community partners between April and May 2022 in Chicago, in-person and via phone.ParticipantsA purposive sample of Chicagoans (n = 456), who were: (1) adults (≥18 years); (2) living in priority areas in Chicago heavily impacted by COVID-19; (3) who spoke English or Spanish; and (4) had not received the COVID-19 vaccine.MethodA transdisciplinary academic-community team co-developed an assessment tool. Members of Chicago's Community Health Response Corps (CHRC) (N = 115) interviewed participants, using a 46-item survey in Qualtrics. Interviews were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative software, including Dedoose for coding and SAS for descriptive statistics.ResultsOver half of all respondents were not concerned about getting COVID-19. Respondents voiced concerns about side effects (36%), vaccine safety (27%), and trust in governmental institutions, given historical events involving unethical research. Participants also reported other social needs (e.g., food or housing insecurity) that made COVID-19 a lower priority.ConclusionThe collaborative research approach highlighted issues of trust, concerns about side effects and vaccine safety, issues that have informed vaccine messaging.</p>","PeriodicalId":7481,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Health Promotion","volume":" ","pages":"647-653"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Health Promotion","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08901171241307435","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
PurposeIn response to disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake in urban environments, we ascertained whether a community-engaged evaluation could rapidly determine why unvaccinated Chicago residents were hesitant to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.ApproachThe assessment used a mixed-methods approach, grounded in community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles.SettingInterviews were conducted by community partners between April and May 2022 in Chicago, in-person and via phone.ParticipantsA purposive sample of Chicagoans (n = 456), who were: (1) adults (≥18 years); (2) living in priority areas in Chicago heavily impacted by COVID-19; (3) who spoke English or Spanish; and (4) had not received the COVID-19 vaccine.MethodA transdisciplinary academic-community team co-developed an assessment tool. Members of Chicago's Community Health Response Corps (CHRC) (N = 115) interviewed participants, using a 46-item survey in Qualtrics. Interviews were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative software, including Dedoose for coding and SAS for descriptive statistics.ResultsOver half of all respondents were not concerned about getting COVID-19. Respondents voiced concerns about side effects (36%), vaccine safety (27%), and trust in governmental institutions, given historical events involving unethical research. Participants also reported other social needs (e.g., food or housing insecurity) that made COVID-19 a lower priority.ConclusionThe collaborative research approach highlighted issues of trust, concerns about side effects and vaccine safety, issues that have informed vaccine messaging.
期刊介绍:
The editorial goal of the American Journal of Health Promotion is to provide a forum for exchange among the many disciplines involved in health promotion and an interface between researchers and practitioners.