Understanding Covid-19 misinformation and vaccine hesitancy in context: Findings from a qualitative study involving citizens in Bradford, UK
Rosemary R. C. McEachan,
on behalf of the Bradford Institute for Health Research Covid-19 Scientific Advisory Group
Posted 26 Dec 2020
medRxiv DOI: 10.1101/2020.12.22.20248259
Posted 26 Dec 2020
BackgroundCovid-19 vaccines can offer a route out of the pandemic, yet initial research suggests that many are unwilling to be vaccinated. A rise in the spread of misinformation is thought to have played a significant role in this vaccine hesitancy. In order to maximise vaccine uptake it is important to understand why misinformation has been able to take hold at this time and why it may pose a more significant problem within certain populations and places. ObjectiveTo understand peoples Covid-19 beliefs, their interactions with health (mis)information during Covid-19 and attitudes towards a Covid-19 vaccine. Design and participantsIn-depth phone interviews were carried out with 20 people from different ethnic groups and areas of Bradford during Autumn 2020. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted. ResultsParticipants spoke about a wide range of emotive misinformation they had encountered regarding Covid-19, resulting in confusion, distress and mistrust. Vaccine hesitancy could be attributed to three prominent factors: safety concerns, negative stories and personal knowledge. The more confused, distressed and mistrusting participants felt about their social worlds during the pandemic, the less positive they were about a vaccine. ConclusionsCovid-19 vaccine hesitancy needs to be understood in the context of the relationship between the spread of misinformation and associated emotional reactions. Vaccine programmes should provide a focused, localised and empathetic response to counter misinformation. Patient or public contributionA rapid community and stakeholder engagement process was undertaken to identify Covid-19 related priority topics important to both Bradford citizens and local decision makers.
- Downloaded 2,035 times
- Download rankings, all-time:
- Site-wide: 8,507
- In public and global health: 213
- Year to date:
- Site-wide: 1,338
- Since beginning of last month:
- Site-wide: 27,614
Downloads over time
Distribution of downloads per paper, site-wide
- 27 Nov 2020: The website and API now include results pulled from medRxiv as well as bioRxiv.
- 18 Dec 2019: We're pleased to announce PanLingua, a new tool that enables you to search for machine-translated bioRxiv preprints using more than 100 different languages.
- 21 May 2019: PLOS Biology has published a community page about Rxivist.org and its design.
- 10 May 2019: The paper analyzing the Rxivist dataset has been published at eLife.
- 1 Mar 2019: We now have summary statistics about bioRxiv downloads and submissions.
- 8 Feb 2019: Data from Altmetric is now available on the Rxivist details page for every preprint. Look for the "donut" under the download metrics.
- 30 Jan 2019: preLights has featured the Rxivist preprint and written about our findings.
- 22 Jan 2019: Nature just published an article about Rxivist and our data.
- 13 Jan 2019: The Rxivist preprint is live!