COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the adult population in Bangladesh: A nationwide cross-sectional survey

  1. Mohammad Bellal Hossain
  2. Md. Zakiul Alam
  3. Md. Syful Islam
  4. Shafayat Sultan
  5. Md. Mahir Faysal
  6. Sharmin Rima
  7. Md. Anwer Hossain
  8. Abdullah Al Mamun

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Studies related to the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy are scanty in Bangladesh, despite the growing necessity of understanding the population behavior related to vaccination. Thus, the present study was conducted to assess the prevalence of the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its associated factors in Bangladesh to fill the knowledge gap.

Methods and materials

This study adopted a cross-sectional design to collect data from 1497 respondents using online (Google forms) and face-to-face interviews from eight administrative divisions of Bangladesh between 1–7 February 2021. We employed descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression analysis.

Results

The prevalence of vaccine hesitancy was 46.2%. The Muslims (aOR = 1.80, p ≤ 0.01) and the respondents living in the city corporation areas (aOR = 2.14, p ≤0.001) had more hesitancy. There was significant variation in vaccine hesitancy by administrative divisions (geographic regions). Compared to the Sylhet division, the participants from Khulna (aOR = 1.31, p ≤0.001) had higher hesitancy. The vaccine hesitancy tended to decrease with increasing knowledge about the vaccine (aOR = 0.88, p≤0.001) and the vaccination process (aOR = 0.91, p ≤ 0.01). On the other hand, hesitancy increased with the increased negative attitudes towards the vaccine (aOR = 1.17, p≤0.001) and conspiracy beliefs towards the COVID-19 vaccine (aOR = 1.04, p≤0.01). The perceived benefits of COVID-19 vaccination (aOR = 0.85, p≤0.001) were negatively associated with hesitancy, while perceived barriers (aOR = 1.16, p ≤0.001) were positively associated. The participants were more hesitant to accept the vaccine from a specific country of origin (India, USA, Europe).

Conclusions

Our findings warrant that a vigorous behavior change communication campaign should be designed and implemented to demystify negative public attitudes and conspiracy beliefs regarding the COVID-19 Vaccine in Bangladesh. The policymakers should also think about revisiting the policy of the online registration process to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, as online registration is a key structural barrier for many due to the persistent digital divide in the country. Finally, the government should consider the population’s preference regarding vaccines’ country of manufacture to reduce the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pone.0260821
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.23.21255844: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Though this study explored the extent of hesitancy and associated factors about the COVID-19 vaccine in Bangladesh, which will help policymakers develop messages to counter the anti-vaccine campaign, some limitations should be considered in interpreting the results. This study used a non-probability sampling; therefore, we should be careful about the generalization of the findings. Though this study tried to represent the national population in terms of age, sex, residence, region, marital status, and religion, the distribution of education among the respondents is to some extent not comparable to national data. This study collected self-reported data that may suffer from reporting bias to some extent. Finally, this research used a cross-sectional study design which limits the causality.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.04.23.21255844v1 on medRxiv