Cargando…
1371. Results From the COVID-19 Vaccines Discrete Choice Experiment Pre-Test Qualitative Interviews in Canada, Germany, the UK, and US General Population
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccine preferences can influence vaccine coverage. Discrete choice experiments (DCE) can be used to elicit people’s trade-offs. DCEs require evidence-based attribute selection and validation of understanding with lay audiences. To inform a future DCE, a pre-test was conducted t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10678989/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.1208 |
_version_ | 1785150487616552960 |
---|---|
author | Bhashyam, Sumitra Sri Shane, L G Lewis, Hannah B de la Cruz, Marie Galinsky, Jayne Demchuk, Keeva Waite, Nancy M Lazarus, Jeffrey V Salisbury, David M |
author_facet | Bhashyam, Sumitra Sri Shane, L G Lewis, Hannah B de la Cruz, Marie Galinsky, Jayne Demchuk, Keeva Waite, Nancy M Lazarus, Jeffrey V Salisbury, David M |
author_sort | Bhashyam, Sumitra Sri |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccine preferences can influence vaccine coverage. Discrete choice experiments (DCE) can be used to elicit people’s trade-offs. DCEs require evidence-based attribute selection and validation of understanding with lay audiences. To inform a future DCE, a pre-test was conducted to examine the survey and refine six attributes selected from a targeted literature review and expert interviews. METHODS: Interviews were conducted in March 2023 in Canada, Germany, the UK, and US. Self-reported anti-vaccinationists were excluded. Eligible individuals were interviewed during the completion of a survey that included 11 choice tasks and supplementary questions. The “think aloud” method was used to evaluate participants’ understanding of the survey and if they were making trade-offs as hypothesized. Four country-level experts validated the survey modifications based on the results. RESULTS: Six phone interviews were completed in each country (N=24). Mean age was 43.7; 50% were women; 50% reported receiving the full COVID-19 vaccine series; 45.8% received the initial series but were unsure about additional doses; 1 was unvaccinated (4.2%). Participants’ top four priorities were vaccine protection against COVID-19, serious side-effects, protection against severe COVID-19, and common side-effects, followed by vaccine type and timing of COVID-19/influenza vaccines (Fig 1). More than half of the participants would consider co-administration of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines, either as two separate injections (58.3%) or as a single, combined injection (62.5%) (Fig 2a). Most individuals (54.2%) preferred an annual COVID-19 vaccine; over every 6 months (4.2%), and 20.8% were indifferent (Fig 2b). When deciding to get vaccinated, most considered the following to be important: how long a vaccine was examined in humans (65.2%), how long a vaccine was used in a vaccination program (62.5%); 50% considered vaccine type (mRNA or protein subunit) important (Fig 3). [Figure: see text] [Figure: see text] [Figure: see text] CONCLUSION: This study validated the importance of key vaccine attributes driving people’s choices and feedback was used to improve the clarity of attribute descriptions. A future DCE will be fielded to increase the understanding of COVID-19 vaccine preference and hesitancy. DISCLOSURES: Sumitra Sri Bhashyam, MSc, PhD, Novavax Inc: Grant/Research Support L.G Shane, Pharm.D., RPH., BScPharm., Novavax Inc: Employee of Novavax Inc|Novavax Inc: Stocks/Bonds Hannah B. Lewis, MSc, PhD, Novavax Inc: Grant/Research Support Marie de la Cruz, MS, Novavax Inc: Grant/Research Support Jayne Galinsky, PhD, Novavax Inc: Grant/Research Support Keeva Demchuk, n/a, Novavax Inc: Grant/Research Support Nancy M. Waite, Waite PharmD FCCP, GSK: Advisor/Consultant|Novavax Inc: Honoraria|Pfizer: Advisor/Consultant|Sanofi: Advisor/Consultant|Sanofi: Grant/Research Support Jeffrey V. Lazarus, PhD, MIH, MA, AbbVie: Advisor/Consultant|AbbVie: Conference travel|Gilead Sciences: Advisor/Consultant|Gilead Sciences: Grant/Research Support|Gilead Sciences: Honoraria|Moderna: Honoraria|Novavax Inc: Advisor/Consultant|Novavax Inc: Honoraria|Novo Nordisk: Honoraria|Roche Diagnostics: Grant/Research Support David M. Salisbury, CB FMedSci FRCP FRCPCH FFPH, Clover Pharmaceuticals: Advisor/Consultant|GSK: Advisor/Consultant|Moderna: Advisor/Consultant|Novavax Inc: Honoraria|Sanofi: Advisor/Consultant |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10678989 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106789892023-11-27 1371. Results From the COVID-19 Vaccines Discrete Choice Experiment Pre-Test Qualitative Interviews in Canada, Germany, the UK, and US General Population Bhashyam, Sumitra Sri Shane, L G Lewis, Hannah B de la Cruz, Marie Galinsky, Jayne Demchuk, Keeva Waite, Nancy M Lazarus, Jeffrey V Salisbury, David M Open Forum Infect Dis Abstract BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccine preferences can influence vaccine coverage. Discrete choice experiments (DCE) can be used to elicit people’s trade-offs. DCEs require evidence-based attribute selection and validation of understanding with lay audiences. To inform a future DCE, a pre-test was conducted to examine the survey and refine six attributes selected from a targeted literature review and expert interviews. METHODS: Interviews were conducted in March 2023 in Canada, Germany, the UK, and US. Self-reported anti-vaccinationists were excluded. Eligible individuals were interviewed during the completion of a survey that included 11 choice tasks and supplementary questions. The “think aloud” method was used to evaluate participants’ understanding of the survey and if they were making trade-offs as hypothesized. Four country-level experts validated the survey modifications based on the results. RESULTS: Six phone interviews were completed in each country (N=24). Mean age was 43.7; 50% were women; 50% reported receiving the full COVID-19 vaccine series; 45.8% received the initial series but were unsure about additional doses; 1 was unvaccinated (4.2%). Participants’ top four priorities were vaccine protection against COVID-19, serious side-effects, protection against severe COVID-19, and common side-effects, followed by vaccine type and timing of COVID-19/influenza vaccines (Fig 1). More than half of the participants would consider co-administration of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines, either as two separate injections (58.3%) or as a single, combined injection (62.5%) (Fig 2a). Most individuals (54.2%) preferred an annual COVID-19 vaccine; over every 6 months (4.2%), and 20.8% were indifferent (Fig 2b). When deciding to get vaccinated, most considered the following to be important: how long a vaccine was examined in humans (65.2%), how long a vaccine was used in a vaccination program (62.5%); 50% considered vaccine type (mRNA or protein subunit) important (Fig 3). [Figure: see text] [Figure: see text] [Figure: see text] CONCLUSION: This study validated the importance of key vaccine attributes driving people’s choices and feedback was used to improve the clarity of attribute descriptions. A future DCE will be fielded to increase the understanding of COVID-19 vaccine preference and hesitancy. DISCLOSURES: Sumitra Sri Bhashyam, MSc, PhD, Novavax Inc: Grant/Research Support L.G Shane, Pharm.D., RPH., BScPharm., Novavax Inc: Employee of Novavax Inc|Novavax Inc: Stocks/Bonds Hannah B. Lewis, MSc, PhD, Novavax Inc: Grant/Research Support Marie de la Cruz, MS, Novavax Inc: Grant/Research Support Jayne Galinsky, PhD, Novavax Inc: Grant/Research Support Keeva Demchuk, n/a, Novavax Inc: Grant/Research Support Nancy M. Waite, Waite PharmD FCCP, GSK: Advisor/Consultant|Novavax Inc: Honoraria|Pfizer: Advisor/Consultant|Sanofi: Advisor/Consultant|Sanofi: Grant/Research Support Jeffrey V. Lazarus, PhD, MIH, MA, AbbVie: Advisor/Consultant|AbbVie: Conference travel|Gilead Sciences: Advisor/Consultant|Gilead Sciences: Grant/Research Support|Gilead Sciences: Honoraria|Moderna: Honoraria|Novavax Inc: Advisor/Consultant|Novavax Inc: Honoraria|Novo Nordisk: Honoraria|Roche Diagnostics: Grant/Research Support David M. Salisbury, CB FMedSci FRCP FRCPCH FFPH, Clover Pharmaceuticals: Advisor/Consultant|GSK: Advisor/Consultant|Moderna: Advisor/Consultant|Novavax Inc: Honoraria|Sanofi: Advisor/Consultant Oxford University Press 2023-11-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10678989/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.1208 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Abstract Bhashyam, Sumitra Sri Shane, L G Lewis, Hannah B de la Cruz, Marie Galinsky, Jayne Demchuk, Keeva Waite, Nancy M Lazarus, Jeffrey V Salisbury, David M 1371. Results From the COVID-19 Vaccines Discrete Choice Experiment Pre-Test Qualitative Interviews in Canada, Germany, the UK, and US General Population |
title | 1371. Results From the COVID-19 Vaccines Discrete Choice Experiment Pre-Test Qualitative Interviews in Canada, Germany, the UK, and US General Population |
title_full | 1371. Results From the COVID-19 Vaccines Discrete Choice Experiment Pre-Test Qualitative Interviews in Canada, Germany, the UK, and US General Population |
title_fullStr | 1371. Results From the COVID-19 Vaccines Discrete Choice Experiment Pre-Test Qualitative Interviews in Canada, Germany, the UK, and US General Population |
title_full_unstemmed | 1371. Results From the COVID-19 Vaccines Discrete Choice Experiment Pre-Test Qualitative Interviews in Canada, Germany, the UK, and US General Population |
title_short | 1371. Results From the COVID-19 Vaccines Discrete Choice Experiment Pre-Test Qualitative Interviews in Canada, Germany, the UK, and US General Population |
title_sort | 1371. results from the covid-19 vaccines discrete choice experiment pre-test qualitative interviews in canada, germany, the uk, and us general population |
topic | Abstract |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10678989/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.1208 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bhashyamsumitrasri 1371resultsfromthecovid19vaccinesdiscretechoiceexperimentpretestqualitativeinterviewsincanadagermanytheukandusgeneralpopulation AT shanelg 1371resultsfromthecovid19vaccinesdiscretechoiceexperimentpretestqualitativeinterviewsincanadagermanytheukandusgeneralpopulation AT lewishannahb 1371resultsfromthecovid19vaccinesdiscretechoiceexperimentpretestqualitativeinterviewsincanadagermanytheukandusgeneralpopulation AT delacruzmarie 1371resultsfromthecovid19vaccinesdiscretechoiceexperimentpretestqualitativeinterviewsincanadagermanytheukandusgeneralpopulation AT galinskyjayne 1371resultsfromthecovid19vaccinesdiscretechoiceexperimentpretestqualitativeinterviewsincanadagermanytheukandusgeneralpopulation AT demchukkeeva 1371resultsfromthecovid19vaccinesdiscretechoiceexperimentpretestqualitativeinterviewsincanadagermanytheukandusgeneralpopulation AT waitenancym 1371resultsfromthecovid19vaccinesdiscretechoiceexperimentpretestqualitativeinterviewsincanadagermanytheukandusgeneralpopulation AT lazarusjeffreyv 1371resultsfromthecovid19vaccinesdiscretechoiceexperimentpretestqualitativeinterviewsincanadagermanytheukandusgeneralpopulation AT salisburydavidm 1371resultsfromthecovid19vaccinesdiscretechoiceexperimentpretestqualitativeinterviewsincanadagermanytheukandusgeneralpopulation |