加拿大艾滋病毒感染者对 COVID-19 疫苗信心的性别差异

IF 2.7 Q3 IMMUNOLOGY
Jessica Lu , Branka Vulesevic , Ann N. Burchell , Joel Singer , Judy Needham , Yanbo Yang , Hong Qian , Catharine Chambers , Hasina Samji , Ines Colmegna , Sugandhi del Canto , Guy-Henri Godin , Muluba Habanyama , Sze Shing Christian Hui , Abigail Kroch , Enrico Mandarino , Shari Margolese , Carrie Martin , Maureen Owino , Elisa Lau , Cecilia T. Costiniuk
{"title":"加拿大艾滋病毒感染者对 COVID-19 疫苗信心的性别差异","authors":"Jessica Lu ,&nbsp;Branka Vulesevic ,&nbsp;Ann N. Burchell ,&nbsp;Joel Singer ,&nbsp;Judy Needham ,&nbsp;Yanbo Yang ,&nbsp;Hong Qian ,&nbsp;Catharine Chambers ,&nbsp;Hasina Samji ,&nbsp;Ines Colmegna ,&nbsp;Sugandhi del Canto ,&nbsp;Guy-Henri Godin ,&nbsp;Muluba Habanyama ,&nbsp;Sze Shing Christian Hui ,&nbsp;Abigail Kroch ,&nbsp;Enrico Mandarino ,&nbsp;Shari Margolese ,&nbsp;Carrie Martin ,&nbsp;Maureen Owino ,&nbsp;Elisa Lau ,&nbsp;Cecilia T. Costiniuk","doi":"10.1016/j.jvacx.2024.100566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Understanding the roots of vaccine confidence in vulnerable populations, such as persons living with HIV (PLWH), is important to facilitate vaccine uptake, thus mitigating infection and spread of vaccine-preventable infectious diseases. In an online survey of PLWH conducted in Canada during winter 2022 (<em>AIDS and Behav 2023</em>), we reported that the overall COVID-19 vaccination uptake rate in PLWH was similar by sex. Here, we examined attitudes and beliefs towards vaccination against COVID-19 based on sex.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Between February and May 2022, PLWH across Canada were recruited via social media and community-based organizations to complete an online survey consisting of a modified Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) questionnaire with items from the National Advisory Committee on Immunization Acceptability Matrix. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant characteristics and responses to the VHS questionnaire by sex. The effect of biological sex on total VHS score, two subscales (“lack of confidence” and “perceived risk”) was assessed separately by linear regression adjusting for other key baseline variables.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 259 PLWH, 69 (27 %) were females and 189 (73 %) were males. Sixty-six (26 %) of participants self-identified as a woman, 163(63 %) as a man and 28(11 %) as trans/two-spirited/queer/non-binary/agender/other. The mean age (SD) was 47 ± 14 years. Females were less likely to believe that COVID-19 vaccination was: important for his/her own health (71 % vs. 86 %); a good way to protect themselves from infection (68 % vs. 86 %); that getting the COVID-19 vaccine was important for the health of others in his/her community (78 % vs. 91 %); believed recommendations by their doctor/health care provider about COVID-19 vaccines (78 % vs. 88 %); that information about COVID-19 vaccines from public health officials was reliable and trustworthy (56 % vs. 75 % vs); COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing COVID-19 infections (61 % vs. 82 %) and that all COVID-19 vaccines offered by government programs in their communities were important for good health (70 % vs. 87 %). Although more males than females felt that new vaccines generally carry more risks than older vaccines (19 % vs 16 %,), fewer males than females endorsed concern about serious side effects of COVID-19 vaccines (33 % vs 45 %).</div><div>The linear regression model showed females had a significantly higher VHS total score than males (adjusted mean difference 0.38; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.13–0.64; p = 0.004), indicating greater COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among females. It was observed that females had a greater “lack of confidence in vaccines” score than males (adjusted mean difference 0.43; 95 % CI 0.14–0.73; p = 0.004). We did not observe a significant difference in “perceived risk in vaccines” between males and females (adjusted mean difference 0.20; 95 % CI −0.07–0.46; p = 0.1). The inadequate number of participants self-identifying as different from biological sex at birth prevented us from analyzing the VHS score based on gender identity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Among PLWH, females showed greater COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy than males. Specifically, compared with males, females had a higher level of lack of confidence in vaccines. Fewer females than males believed that COVID-19 vaccines had health benefits at both the personal and societal levels and that recommendations made by their doctor/health care provider and public health officials are reliable and trustworthy. Further investigation into reasons for this difference in opinion still needs to be elucidated. Educational interventions targeted toward females living with HIV are especially needed to increase confidence in vaccination.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":43021,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine: X","volume":"21 ","pages":"Article 100566"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sex differences in COVID-19 vaccine confidence in people living with HIV in Canada\",\"authors\":\"Jessica Lu ,&nbsp;Branka Vulesevic ,&nbsp;Ann N. Burchell ,&nbsp;Joel Singer ,&nbsp;Judy Needham ,&nbsp;Yanbo Yang ,&nbsp;Hong Qian ,&nbsp;Catharine Chambers ,&nbsp;Hasina Samji ,&nbsp;Ines Colmegna ,&nbsp;Sugandhi del Canto ,&nbsp;Guy-Henri Godin ,&nbsp;Muluba Habanyama ,&nbsp;Sze Shing Christian Hui ,&nbsp;Abigail Kroch ,&nbsp;Enrico Mandarino ,&nbsp;Shari Margolese ,&nbsp;Carrie Martin ,&nbsp;Maureen Owino ,&nbsp;Elisa Lau ,&nbsp;Cecilia T. Costiniuk\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jvacx.2024.100566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Understanding the roots of vaccine confidence in vulnerable populations, such as persons living with HIV (PLWH), is important to facilitate vaccine uptake, thus mitigating infection and spread of vaccine-preventable infectious diseases. In an online survey of PLWH conducted in Canada during winter 2022 (<em>AIDS and Behav 2023</em>), we reported that the overall COVID-19 vaccination uptake rate in PLWH was similar by sex. Here, we examined attitudes and beliefs towards vaccination against COVID-19 based on sex.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Between February and May 2022, PLWH across Canada were recruited via social media and community-based organizations to complete an online survey consisting of a modified Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) questionnaire with items from the National Advisory Committee on Immunization Acceptability Matrix. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant characteristics and responses to the VHS questionnaire by sex. The effect of biological sex on total VHS score, two subscales (“lack of confidence” and “perceived risk”) was assessed separately by linear regression adjusting for other key baseline variables.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 259 PLWH, 69 (27 %) were females and 189 (73 %) were males. Sixty-six (26 %) of participants self-identified as a woman, 163(63 %) as a man and 28(11 %) as trans/two-spirited/queer/non-binary/agender/other. The mean age (SD) was 47 ± 14 years. Females were less likely to believe that COVID-19 vaccination was: important for his/her own health (71 % vs. 86 %); a good way to protect themselves from infection (68 % vs. 86 %); that getting the COVID-19 vaccine was important for the health of others in his/her community (78 % vs. 91 %); believed recommendations by their doctor/health care provider about COVID-19 vaccines (78 % vs. 88 %); that information about COVID-19 vaccines from public health officials was reliable and trustworthy (56 % vs. 75 % vs); COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing COVID-19 infections (61 % vs. 82 %) and that all COVID-19 vaccines offered by government programs in their communities were important for good health (70 % vs. 87 %). Although more males than females felt that new vaccines generally carry more risks than older vaccines (19 % vs 16 %,), fewer males than females endorsed concern about serious side effects of COVID-19 vaccines (33 % vs 45 %).</div><div>The linear regression model showed females had a significantly higher VHS total score than males (adjusted mean difference 0.38; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.13–0.64; p = 0.004), indicating greater COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among females. It was observed that females had a greater “lack of confidence in vaccines” score than males (adjusted mean difference 0.43; 95 % CI 0.14–0.73; p = 0.004). We did not observe a significant difference in “perceived risk in vaccines” between males and females (adjusted mean difference 0.20; 95 % CI −0.07–0.46; p = 0.1). The inadequate number of participants self-identifying as different from biological sex at birth prevented us from analyzing the VHS score based on gender identity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Among PLWH, females showed greater COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy than males. Specifically, compared with males, females had a higher level of lack of confidence in vaccines. Fewer females than males believed that COVID-19 vaccines had health benefits at both the personal and societal levels and that recommendations made by their doctor/health care provider and public health officials are reliable and trustworthy. Further investigation into reasons for this difference in opinion still needs to be elucidated. Educational interventions targeted toward females living with HIV are especially needed to increase confidence in vaccination.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vaccine: X\",\"volume\":\"21 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100566\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vaccine: X\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590136224001396\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vaccine: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590136224001396","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景了解艾滋病病毒感染者(PLWH)等易感人群对疫苗信心的根源对于促进疫苗接种,从而减少疫苗可预防传染病的感染和传播非常重要。在 2022 年冬季对加拿大艾滋病毒感染者进行的在线调查(AIDS and Behav 2023)中,我们发现不同性别的艾滋病毒感染者对 COVID-19 疫苗的总体接种率相似。方法在 2022 年 2 月至 5 月期间,我们通过社交媒体和社区组织招募了加拿大各地的 PLWH,让他们完成一项在线调查,调查内容包括经修订的疫苗犹豫不决量表 (VHS) 问卷以及国家免疫咨询委员会可接受性矩阵中的项目。调查采用描述性统计方法,按性别总结了参与者的特征和对 VHS 问卷的回答。通过线性回归分别评估了生理性别对 VHS 总分和两个分量表("缺乏信心 "和 "感知风险")的影响,并对其他关键基线变量进行了调整。66名参与者(26%)自我认同为女性,163名参与者(63%)自我认同为男性,28名参与者(11%)自我认同为变性人/双性恋者/同性恋者/非二元性别者/其他性别者。平均年龄(标清)为 47 ± 14 岁。女性不太可能认为接种 COVID-19 疫苗:对其自身健康很重要(71% 对 86%);是保护自己免受感染的好方法(68% 对 86%);接种 COVID-19 疫苗对其社区其他人的健康很重要(78% 对 91%);相信其医生/医疗保健提供者关于 COVID-19 疫苗的建议(78% 对 88%);相信关于 COVID-19 疫苗的信息(78% 对 88%)。88 %);认为公共卫生官员提供的有关 COVID-19 疫苗的信息可靠可信(56 % vs. 75 %);认为 COVID-19 疫苗能有效预防 COVID-19 感染(61 % vs. 82 %);认为社区内政府项目提供的所有 COVID-19 疫苗对健康都很重要(70 % vs. 87 %)。线性回归模型显示,女性的 VHS 总分显著高于男性(调整后均值差异为 0.38;95 % 置信区间 (CI)为 0.13-0.64;P = 0.004),这表明女性对 COVID-19 疫苗的犹豫程度更高。据观察,女性的 "对疫苗缺乏信心 "得分高于男性(调整后的平均差异为 0.43;95 % 置信区间为 0.14-0.73;p = 0.004)。我们没有观察到男性和女性在 "疫苗风险感知 "方面存在明显差异(调整后平均差异为 0.20;95 % CI -0.07-0.46;p = 0.1)。由于自认与出生时生理性别不同的参与者人数不足,我们无法分析基于性别认同的 VHS 评分。具体而言,与男性相比,女性对疫苗缺乏信心的程度更高。女性比男性更不相信 COVID-19 疫苗对个人和社会都有健康益处,也不相信医生/保健提供者和公共卫生官员的建议是可靠和值得信赖的。造成这种观点差异的原因仍需进一步调查。尤其需要针对女性艾滋病毒感染者采取教育干预措施,以增强她们对接种疫苗的信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sex differences in COVID-19 vaccine confidence in people living with HIV in Canada

Background

Understanding the roots of vaccine confidence in vulnerable populations, such as persons living with HIV (PLWH), is important to facilitate vaccine uptake, thus mitigating infection and spread of vaccine-preventable infectious diseases. In an online survey of PLWH conducted in Canada during winter 2022 (AIDS and Behav 2023), we reported that the overall COVID-19 vaccination uptake rate in PLWH was similar by sex. Here, we examined attitudes and beliefs towards vaccination against COVID-19 based on sex.

Methods

Between February and May 2022, PLWH across Canada were recruited via social media and community-based organizations to complete an online survey consisting of a modified Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) questionnaire with items from the National Advisory Committee on Immunization Acceptability Matrix. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant characteristics and responses to the VHS questionnaire by sex. The effect of biological sex on total VHS score, two subscales (“lack of confidence” and “perceived risk”) was assessed separately by linear regression adjusting for other key baseline variables.

Results

Of 259 PLWH, 69 (27 %) were females and 189 (73 %) were males. Sixty-six (26 %) of participants self-identified as a woman, 163(63 %) as a man and 28(11 %) as trans/two-spirited/queer/non-binary/agender/other. The mean age (SD) was 47 ± 14 years. Females were less likely to believe that COVID-19 vaccination was: important for his/her own health (71 % vs. 86 %); a good way to protect themselves from infection (68 % vs. 86 %); that getting the COVID-19 vaccine was important for the health of others in his/her community (78 % vs. 91 %); believed recommendations by their doctor/health care provider about COVID-19 vaccines (78 % vs. 88 %); that information about COVID-19 vaccines from public health officials was reliable and trustworthy (56 % vs. 75 % vs); COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing COVID-19 infections (61 % vs. 82 %) and that all COVID-19 vaccines offered by government programs in their communities were important for good health (70 % vs. 87 %). Although more males than females felt that new vaccines generally carry more risks than older vaccines (19 % vs 16 %,), fewer males than females endorsed concern about serious side effects of COVID-19 vaccines (33 % vs 45 %).
The linear regression model showed females had a significantly higher VHS total score than males (adjusted mean difference 0.38; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.13–0.64; p = 0.004), indicating greater COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among females. It was observed that females had a greater “lack of confidence in vaccines” score than males (adjusted mean difference 0.43; 95 % CI 0.14–0.73; p = 0.004). We did not observe a significant difference in “perceived risk in vaccines” between males and females (adjusted mean difference 0.20; 95 % CI −0.07–0.46; p = 0.1). The inadequate number of participants self-identifying as different from biological sex at birth prevented us from analyzing the VHS score based on gender identity.

Conclusions

Among PLWH, females showed greater COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy than males. Specifically, compared with males, females had a higher level of lack of confidence in vaccines. Fewer females than males believed that COVID-19 vaccines had health benefits at both the personal and societal levels and that recommendations made by their doctor/health care provider and public health officials are reliable and trustworthy. Further investigation into reasons for this difference in opinion still needs to be elucidated. Educational interventions targeted toward females living with HIV are especially needed to increase confidence in vaccination.
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
Vaccine: X
Vaccine: X Multiple-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
102
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
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