Factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine decision: What attitudes can we expect from young Poles in the future? A cross-sectional, representative survey.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Aneta Tomaszewska, Barbara Bałan, Karolina Sobeczek, Kamil Rakocy, Konrad Furmańczyk, Mariola Chrzanowska, Piotr Samel-Kowalik, Filip Raciborski, Bolesław Samoliński
{"title":"Factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine decision: What attitudes can we expect from young Poles in the future? A cross-sectional, representative survey.","authors":"Aneta Tomaszewska, Barbara Bałan, Karolina Sobeczek, Kamil Rakocy, Konrad Furmańczyk, Mariola Chrzanowska, Piotr Samel-Kowalik, Filip Raciborski, Bolesław Samoliński","doi":"10.13075/ijomeh.1896.02595","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to identify factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination decisions and reasons for vaccine refusal among young Poles - a population with the lowest uptake in the country.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted using the computerassisted personal interview method on a representative sample of 1560 individuals aged 15-39 years. The multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyze the relationship between selected factors and COVID-19 vaccination status.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The likelihood of vaccination was significantly higher among women (odds ratio [OR] = 1.64), individuals aged 25-39 years (OR = 2.47), those with higher education (OR = 4.84), married (OR = 2.18), parents (OR = 2.35) and deeply religious respondents (OR = 4.97). The strongest predictor was fear of COVID-19 infection (OR = 28.14). Among vaccine-hesitant individuals, the most common concerns were vaccine safety (40%) and efficacy (35%). Others perceived COVID-19 as a mild illness (27%), believed prior infection provided sufficient immunity (22%), or preferred natural methods (14%). Vaccination status correlated with attitudes toward vaccines and the pandemic. The strongest positive correlations were with beliefs that vaccination protects others (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.59), COVID-19 vaccines are a medical success (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.51), and that experts promoting vaccines are credible (r<sub>s</sub> = 0.45). Negative correlations were linked to misinformation, such as claims about genetic effects, unethical experimentation, or dangerous ingredients. The reasons for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine cluster into 2 groups: modifiable and non-modifiable. This division assumes that it is possible to intervene to modify some factors, while others are beyond our control.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Vaccine hesitancy is shaped not only by lack of knowledge but also by mistrust and social polarization. Therefore, public health strategies should combine educational efforts with communication delivered through trusted channels. Otherwise, polarization may persist - with only part of the hesitant group open to change. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2025;38(4).</p>","PeriodicalId":14173,"journal":{"name":"International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13075/ijomeh.1896.02595","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to identify factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination decisions and reasons for vaccine refusal among young Poles - a population with the lowest uptake in the country.

Material and methods: A nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted using the computerassisted personal interview method on a representative sample of 1560 individuals aged 15-39 years. The multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyze the relationship between selected factors and COVID-19 vaccination status.

Results: The likelihood of vaccination was significantly higher among women (odds ratio [OR] = 1.64), individuals aged 25-39 years (OR = 2.47), those with higher education (OR = 4.84), married (OR = 2.18), parents (OR = 2.35) and deeply religious respondents (OR = 4.97). The strongest predictor was fear of COVID-19 infection (OR = 28.14). Among vaccine-hesitant individuals, the most common concerns were vaccine safety (40%) and efficacy (35%). Others perceived COVID-19 as a mild illness (27%), believed prior infection provided sufficient immunity (22%), or preferred natural methods (14%). Vaccination status correlated with attitudes toward vaccines and the pandemic. The strongest positive correlations were with beliefs that vaccination protects others (rs = 0.59), COVID-19 vaccines are a medical success (rs = 0.51), and that experts promoting vaccines are credible (rs = 0.45). Negative correlations were linked to misinformation, such as claims about genetic effects, unethical experimentation, or dangerous ingredients. The reasons for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine cluster into 2 groups: modifiable and non-modifiable. This division assumes that it is possible to intervene to modify some factors, while others are beyond our control.

Conclusions: Vaccine hesitancy is shaped not only by lack of knowledge but also by mistrust and social polarization. Therefore, public health strategies should combine educational efforts with communication delivered through trusted channels. Otherwise, polarization may persist - with only part of the hesitant group open to change. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2025;38(4).

影响COVID-19疫苗决策的因素:我们可以期待波兰人未来的态度是什么?横断面的、有代表性的调查
目的:本研究旨在确定影响COVID-19疫苗接种决策的因素以及波兰年轻人(该国接种率最低的人群)拒绝接种疫苗的原因。材料与方法:采用计算机辅助个人访谈法,在全国范围内对1560名15-39岁的代表性样本进行了横断面研究。采用多元logistic回归模型分析所选因素与COVID-19疫苗接种状况的关系。结果:女性(比值比[OR] = 1.64)、25-39岁人群(OR = 2.47)、高学历人群(OR = 4.84)、已婚人群(OR = 2.18)、父母人群(OR = 2.35)和虔诚宗教人群(OR = 4.97)接种疫苗的可能性显著较高。对COVID-19感染的恐惧是最强的预测因子(OR = 28.14)。在对疫苗犹豫不决的个人中,最常见的担忧是疫苗安全性(40%)和有效性(35%)。其他人认为COVID-19是一种轻微的疾病(27%),认为先前的感染提供了足够的免疫力(22%),或者更喜欢自然方法(14%)。疫苗接种状况与对疫苗和大流行的态度相关。最强烈的正相关性与以下信念有关:接种疫苗可以保护他人(rs = 0.59)、COVID-19疫苗是医学上的成功(rs = 0.51),以及推广疫苗的专家是可信的(rs = 0.45)。负相关与错误信息有关,例如关于基因影响、不道德实验或危险成分的说法。拒绝COVID-19疫苗集群的原因分为2组:可修改和不可修改。这种划分假设干预可以改变一些因素,而其他因素则超出我们的控制范围。结论:疫苗犹豫不仅是由于缺乏知识造成的,也是由于不信任和社会两极分化造成的。因此,公共卫生战略应将教育工作与通过可信渠道提供的沟通结合起来。否则,两极分化可能会持续下去——只有一部分犹豫不决的人愿意改变。国际医学与环境卫生杂志,2025;38(4)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
52
审稿时长
7.5 months
期刊介绍: The Journal is dedicated to present the contemporary research in occupational and environmental health from all over the world. It publishes works concerning: occupational and environmental: medicine, epidemiology, hygiene and toxicology; work physiology and ergonomics, musculoskeletal problems; psychosocial factors at work, work-related mental problems, aging, work ability and return to work; working hours, shift work; reproductive factors and endocrine disruptors; radiation, ionizing and non-ionizing health effects; agricultural hazards; work safety and injury and occupational health service; climate change and its effects on health; omics, genetics and epigenetics in occupational and environmental health; health effects of exposure to nanoparticles and nanotechnology products; human biomarkers in occupational and environmental health, intervention studies, clinical sciences’ achievements with potential to improve occupational and environmental health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信