在免费诊所接受治疗的无保险人群的疫苗信仰。

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Caroline C Liu, Julio A Siliezar, Omar Alzayat, Carly A Robinson, Timothy Do, Adrianna I J Carter, Christine N Pons, Om Patel, Michael S Wilkes
{"title":"在免费诊所接受治疗的无保险人群的疫苗信仰。","authors":"Caroline C Liu, Julio A Siliezar, Omar Alzayat, Carly A Robinson, Timothy Do, Adrianna I J Carter, Christine N Pons, Om Patel, Michael S Wilkes","doi":"10.1007/s10900-024-01416-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Misinformation and vaccination hesitancy contribute to disparities in vaccination rates, particularly in under-resourced communities. This study aims to investigate perceptions and factors influencing vaccination decisions at free clinics serving diverse, under-resourced communities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Surveys were conducted across eight free clinics in the Greater Sacramento area, targeting uninsured or underinsured individuals. Information on demographics, sources of vaccine information, access to vaccines, vaccine perceptions, and vaccination decisions as pertaining to influenza and COVID-19 were collected on Qualtrics software. Chi-square and t-tests were used to analyze associations between demographics and vaccination rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 109 participants (24-82 years old), vaccination rates were found to be higher than the county average, with notable demographic variations. Contrary to initial hypotheses, men had higher vaccination rates than women, and recent immigrants exhibited higher vaccination rates than more long-term U.S. residents. A higher number of participants regarded the COVID-19 vaccine as effective than as safe, while the reverse was true for the influenza vaccine. Healthcare providers were the most trusted and influential sources for vaccine information, followed by government agencies, and then family and friends. Answers to hypothetical vaccine scenarios elicited assessments on risks and benefits.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study provides insight into the dynamics of vaccine hesitancy and factors that play into the decision-making process in under-resourced communities, underscoring the role of trust in healthcare providers. These findings are vital for tailoring community outreach strategies to create trust, address barriers, and enhance vaccine uptake within free community clinics.</p>","PeriodicalId":15550,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Vaccine Beliefs Among Uninsured People Receiving Care at Free Clinics.\",\"authors\":\"Caroline C Liu, Julio A Siliezar, Omar Alzayat, Carly A Robinson, Timothy Do, Adrianna I J Carter, Christine N Pons, Om Patel, Michael S Wilkes\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10900-024-01416-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Misinformation and vaccination hesitancy contribute to disparities in vaccination rates, particularly in under-resourced communities. This study aims to investigate perceptions and factors influencing vaccination decisions at free clinics serving diverse, under-resourced communities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Surveys were conducted across eight free clinics in the Greater Sacramento area, targeting uninsured or underinsured individuals. Information on demographics, sources of vaccine information, access to vaccines, vaccine perceptions, and vaccination decisions as pertaining to influenza and COVID-19 were collected on Qualtrics software. Chi-square and t-tests were used to analyze associations between demographics and vaccination rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 109 participants (24-82 years old), vaccination rates were found to be higher than the county average, with notable demographic variations. Contrary to initial hypotheses, men had higher vaccination rates than women, and recent immigrants exhibited higher vaccination rates than more long-term U.S. residents. A higher number of participants regarded the COVID-19 vaccine as effective than as safe, while the reverse was true for the influenza vaccine. Healthcare providers were the most trusted and influential sources for vaccine information, followed by government agencies, and then family and friends. Answers to hypothetical vaccine scenarios elicited assessments on risks and benefits.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study provides insight into the dynamics of vaccine hesitancy and factors that play into the decision-making process in under-resourced communities, underscoring the role of trust in healthcare providers. These findings are vital for tailoring community outreach strategies to create trust, address barriers, and enhance vaccine uptake within free community clinics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15550,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Community Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Community Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-024-01416-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-024-01416-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:错误信息和疫苗接种犹豫不决造成了疫苗接种率的差异,尤其是在资源不足的社区。本研究旨在调查服务于不同、资源不足社区的免费诊所对疫苗接种决定的看法和影响因素:在大萨克拉门托地区的八家免费诊所进行了调查,调查对象为无保险或保险不足的个人。通过 Qualtrics 软件收集了有关流感和 COVID-19 的人口统计学、疫苗信息来源、疫苗获取途径、疫苗认知以及疫苗接种决定等方面的信息。采用卡方检验和 t 检验分析人口统计学特征与疫苗接种率之间的关系:在 109 名参与者(24-82 岁)中,疫苗接种率高于全县平均水平,但人口统计学差异明显。与最初的假设相反,男性的疫苗接种率高于女性,新移民的疫苗接种率高于长期居住在美国的居民。更多的参与者认为 COVID-19 疫苗有效而非安全,而流感疫苗的情况恰恰相反。医疗保健提供者是最值得信赖和最有影响力的疫苗信息来源,其次是政府机构,再次是家人和朋友。对假想疫苗情景的回答引起了对风险和益处的评估:这项研究深入探讨了疫苗犹豫不决的动态,以及在资源匮乏社区决策过程中起作用的因素,强调了对医疗服务提供者信任的作用。这些发现对于定制社区外联策略以建立信任、消除障碍和提高免费社区诊所的疫苗接种率至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Vaccine Beliefs Among Uninsured People Receiving Care at Free Clinics.

Background: Misinformation and vaccination hesitancy contribute to disparities in vaccination rates, particularly in under-resourced communities. This study aims to investigate perceptions and factors influencing vaccination decisions at free clinics serving diverse, under-resourced communities.

Methods: Surveys were conducted across eight free clinics in the Greater Sacramento area, targeting uninsured or underinsured individuals. Information on demographics, sources of vaccine information, access to vaccines, vaccine perceptions, and vaccination decisions as pertaining to influenza and COVID-19 were collected on Qualtrics software. Chi-square and t-tests were used to analyze associations between demographics and vaccination rates.

Results: Among 109 participants (24-82 years old), vaccination rates were found to be higher than the county average, with notable demographic variations. Contrary to initial hypotheses, men had higher vaccination rates than women, and recent immigrants exhibited higher vaccination rates than more long-term U.S. residents. A higher number of participants regarded the COVID-19 vaccine as effective than as safe, while the reverse was true for the influenza vaccine. Healthcare providers were the most trusted and influential sources for vaccine information, followed by government agencies, and then family and friends. Answers to hypothetical vaccine scenarios elicited assessments on risks and benefits.

Conclusion: The study provides insight into the dynamics of vaccine hesitancy and factors that play into the decision-making process in under-resourced communities, underscoring the role of trust in healthcare providers. These findings are vital for tailoring community outreach strategies to create trust, address barriers, and enhance vaccine uptake within free community clinics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.80
自引率
1.70%
发文量
113
期刊介绍: The Journal of Community Health is a peer-reviewed publication that offers original articles on research, teaching, and the practice of community health and public health. Coverage includes public health, epidemiology, preventive medicine, health promotion, disease prevention, environmental and occupational health, health policy and management, and health disparities. The Journal does not publish articles on clinical medicine. Serving as a forum for the exchange of ideas, the Journal features articles on research that serve the educational needs of public and community health personnel.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信