Assessment of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Zimbabweans: A rapid national survey

  1. Paddington Tinashe Mundagowa
  2. Samantha Nokuthula Tozivepi
  3. Edward Tafumaneyi Chiyaka
  4. Fadzai Mukora-Mutseyekwa
  5. Richard Makurumidze

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

As a way of minimising the devastating effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, scientists hastily developed a vaccine. However, the scale-up of the vaccine is likely to be hindered by the widespread social media misinformation. We therefore conducted a study to assess the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Zimbabweans.

Methods

We conducted a descriptive online cross-sectional survey using a self-administered questionnaire among adults. The questionnaire assessed willingness to be vaccinated; socio-demographic characteristics, individual attitudes and perceptions, effectiveness and safety of the vaccine. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was utilized to examine the independent factors associated with vaccine uptake.

Results

We analysed data for 1168 participants, age range of 19–89 years with the majority being females (57.5%). Half (49.9%) of the participants reported that they would accept the COVID-19 vaccine. Majority were uncertain about the effectiveness of the vaccine (76.0%) and its safety (55.0%). About half lacked trust in the government’s ability to ensure availability of an effective vaccine and 61.0% mentioned that they would seek advice from a healthcare worker to vaccinate. Chronic disease [vs no chronic disease—Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 1.50, 95% Confidence Interval (CI)I: 1.10–2.03], males [vs females—AOR: 1.83, 95%CI: 1.37–2.44] and being a healthcare worker [vs not being a health worker—AOR: 1.59, 95%CI: 1.18–2.14] were associated with increased likelihood to vaccinate.

Conclusion

We found half of the participants willing to vaccinate against COVID-19. The majority lacked trust in the government and were uncertain about vaccine effectiveness and safety. The policy makers should consider targeting geographical and demographic groups which were unlikely to vaccinate with vaccine information, education and communication to improve uptake.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pone.0266724
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.24.21259505: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: Informed consent was provided online and all participants were asked to accept or reject participation in the online survey.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical Analysis: A database was created in Microsoft Excel using the data extracted from the online server.
    Statistical Analysis
    suggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)
    Microsoft Excel
    suggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)
    Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS (V.26.0).
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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 10.1101/2021.06.24.21259505v1 on medRxiv