Background: While vaccines ensure individual protection against COVID-19 infection, delay in receipt or refusal of vaccines will have both individual and community impacts. The behavioral factors of vaccine hesitancy or refusal are a crucial dimension that need to be understood in order to design appropriate interventions. The aim of this study was to explore the behavioral determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and to provide recommendations to increase the acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines in Bangladesh. Methods: We employed a Barrier Analysis (BA) approach to examine twelve potential behavioral determinants (drawn from the Health Belief Model [HBM] and Theory of Reasoned Action [TRA]) of intended vaccine acceptance. We conducted 45 interviews with those who intended to take the vaccine (Acceptors) and another 45 interviews with those who did not have that intention (Non-acceptors). We performed data analysis to find statistically significant differences and to identify which beliefs were most highly associated with acceptance and non-acceptance with COVID-19 vaccines. Results: The behavioral determinants associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in Dhaka included perceived social norms, perceived safety of COVID-19 vaccines and trust in them, perceived risk/susceptibility, perceived self-efficacy, perceived positive and negative consequences, perceived action efficacy, perceived severity of COVID-19, access, and perceived divine will. In line with the HBM, beliefs about the disease itself were highly predictive of vaccine acceptance, and some of the strongest statistically-significant (p<0.001) predictors of vaccine acceptance in this population are beliefs around both injunctive and descriptive social norms. Specifically, Acceptors were 3.2 times more likely to say they would be very likely to get a COVID-19 vaccine if a doctor or nurse recommended it, twice as likely to say that most people they know will get a vaccine, and 1.3 times more likely to say that most close family and friends will get a vaccine. The perceived safety of vaccines was found to be important since Non-acceptors were 1.8 times more likely to say that COVID-19 vaccines are “not safe at all”. Beliefs about one’s risk of getting COVID-19 disease and the severity of it were predictive of being a vaccine acceptor: Acceptors were 1.4 times more likely to say that it was very likely that someone in their household would get COVID-19, 1.3 times more likely to say that they were very concerned about getting COVID-19, and 1.3 times more likely to say that it would be very serious if someone in their household contracted COVID-19. Other responses of Acceptors on what makes immunization easier may be helpful in programming to boost acceptance, such as providing vaccination through government health facilities, schools, and kiosks, and having vaccinators maintain proper COVID-19 health and safety protocols. Conclusion: An effective behavior change strategy for COVID-19 vaccines uptake will need to address multiple beliefs and behavioral determinants, reducing barriers and leveraging enablers identified in this study. National plans for promoting COVID-19 vaccination should address the barriers, enablers, and behavioral determinants found in this study in order to maximize the impact on COVID-19 vaccination acceptance.

Delayed acceptance or refusal of COVID-19 vaccines may increase and prolong the threat to global public health and the economy. Identifying behavioural determinants is considered a critical step in explaining and addressing the barriers of vaccine refusal. This study aimed to identify the behavioural determinants of COVID-19-vaccine acceptance and provide recommendations to design actionable interventions to increase uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in six lower- and middle-income countries. Taking into consideration the health belief model and the theory of reasoned action, a barrier analysis approach was employed to examine twelve potential behavioural determinants of vaccine acceptance in Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Kenya, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and Tanzania. In all six countries, at least 45 interviews with those who intended to get the vaccine (“Acceptors”) and another 45 or more interviews with those who did not (“Non-acceptors”) were conducted, totalling 542 interviews. Data analysis was performed to find statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences between Acceptors and Non-acceptors of COVID-19 vaccines and to identify which beliefs were most highly associated with acceptance and non-acceptance of vaccination based on the estimated relative risk. The analysis showed that perceived social norms, perceived positive and negative consequences, perceived risk, perceived severity, trust, perceived safety, and expected access to COVID-19 vaccines had the highest associations with COVID-19-vaccine acceptance in Bangladesh, Kenya, Tanzania, and the DRC. Additional behavioural determinants found to be significant in Myanmar and India were perceived self-efficacy, trust in COVID-19 information provided by leaders, perceived divine will, and perceived action efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines. Many of the determinants were found to be significant, and their level of significance varied from country to country. National and local plans should include messages and activities that address the behavioural determinants found in this study to significantly increase the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines across these countries.

Vaccine hesitancy for COVID-19 is a major obstacle to achieving high vaccine coverage. Low vaccine confidence among college students is one factor fueling the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S.The purpo...

Background: As part of an effort to rigorously apply behavioral science to child protection efforts, a behavior change model called Nurturing Care Groups (NCGs) was tested for effectiveness in changing child abuse and corporal punishment behaviors. Objective: The primary research question was to what degree NCGs could change child protection knowledge, attitudes, and practices among caregivers in a low-cost program with broad reach, which could feasibly be scaled. Participants and setting: The NCG project was implemented in two distinct ecological zones in Ghana, reaching 73,959 caregivers of children under 5 across 41 communities; while 20 communities were control sites with no NCG intervention.Methods: Stratified random sampling was used to select intervention area respondents. Cluster sampling was utilized in control areas, using the Probability Proportional to Size method. Standard measures were used to assess changes in practices of violence and abuse, stress experience and management, parenting techniques, and the household environment. Difference-in-difference linear regression was used to compare intervention and control results. Results: Intervention areas demonstrated statistically-significant and substantial changes in reported knowledge, attitudes and behaviors related to physical abuse and corporal punishment. Knowledge of negative impacts of stress on parenting, as well as stress reduction techniques increased in intervention areas, as did positive discipline and parenting practices.Conclusions: The NCG model demonstrated important promising results for changing child protection behaviors in this descriptive study. Statistically-significant decreases in reported physical and psychological punishment and corresponding increases in reported positive discipline indicate that this may be an effective and low-cost intervention for child protection behavior change.