Will Africans Take COVID-19 Vaccination?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The economic and humanistic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has been tremendous globally, including in Africa. No definitive treatment exists yet. The accelerated development and approval of COVID-19 vaccines, therefore, offers a unique opportunity for the prevention and control of COVID-19. The extent to which vaccine hesitancy may limit the success of vaccine distribution is unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the potential coronavirus vaccine hesitancy, and explore the determinants of vaccine hesitancy among Africans.Methods: An online cross-sectional continent-wide (Africa), pretested questionnaire was administered in Arabic, English, and French languages among Africans. The questionnaire comprised questions on demographics of respondents, self-reported health status and literacy, knowledge and perception of vaccines, past experience and behavior, risk assessment of SARS-COV-2, and willingness to receive, voluntariness, and affordability of the SARS-COV-2 vaccine, and vaccine education and distribution. Data obtained were subjected to descriptive and inferential statistics.Results: A total of 5,416 individuals completed the survey. Approximately, 94% were residents of 34 African countries while the others were Africans living in the Diaspora. Only 62% of participants surveyed were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccination. A total of 79% were worried about the side effects of the vaccine, and 39% actually expressed concerns that they might get infected by receiving the vaccine. The odds ratio (OR) of vaccine hesitancy was 0.28 (95% CI: 0.22, 0.30) among those who believed their risk of infection was very high, compared to those who believed their risk of infection was very low. The OR of vaccine hesitancy was 0.21 (95% CI: 0.16, 0.28) among those who believed their risk of falling very sick was very high, compared to those who believed their risk of falling very sick was very low. The OR of vaccine hesitancy was 2.72 (95% CI: 2.24, 3.31) among those who have previously refused a vaccine for themselves or their child compared to counterparts with no self-reported history of vaccine hesitancy. Many participants want the vaccines to be made mandatory (40%), provided free of charge (78%) and distributed at homes and offices (44%).Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is substantial among Africans, and this is related to perceived risk of coronavirus infection and past experiences.Funding: None to declare. Declaration of Interest: None to declare. Ethical Approval: Institutional review boards from Nigeria (University of Ilorin) and Egypt (Ahram Canadian University, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine) approved the study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".