Trusted sources of information on COVID-19 vaccine in Uganda

Author:

Nyeko Oloya Johnson,Onira Alema Nelson,Okot Christopher,Olal Emmanuel,Nzirakaindi Ikoona Eric,Wathum Drinkwater Oyat Freddy,Steven Baguma,Omoya Ochula Denish,Odong Olwedo Patrick,Pebalo Pebolo Francis,Okot Atim Pamela,Smart Okot Godfrey,Nantale Ritah,Aloyo Judith,Lagoro Kitara DavidORCID

Abstract

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically impacted communities worldwide, particularly in developing countries. To successfully control the pandemic, correct information and more than 80% vaccine coverage in a population were required. However, misinformation and disinformation could impact this, thus increasing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in communities. Several studies observed the effect of misinformation and disinformation on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and other responses to the pandemic in the African continent. Thus, the most trusted sources of information on COVID-19 vaccines are critical for the successful management and control of the pandemic. This study aimed to assess the most trusted sources of information on COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic in Uganda. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study on 587 adult population members in northern Uganda. Single-stage stratified and systematic sampling methods were used to select participants from northern Uganda. An interviewer-administered questionnaire with an internal validity of Cronbach’s α = 0.72 was used for data collection. An Institution Review Board (IRB) approved this study and Stata version 18 was used for data analysis. A Pearson Chi-square (χ2) analysis was conducted to assess associations between trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information and selected independent variables. Fisher’s exact test considered associations when the cell value following cross-tabulation was < 5. A P-value < 0.05 was used as evidence for an association between trusted sources of information and independent variables. All results were presented as frequencies, proportions, Chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests, and P-values at 95% Confidence Intervals (CI). Results In a study of 587 participants, most were males, 335(57.1%), in the age group of 25–34 years, 180(31.4%), and the most trusted source of COVID-19 vaccine information were the traditional media sources for example, Televisions, Radios, and Newspapers, 349(33.6%). There was no significant association between sex and trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information. However, by age-group population, COVID-19 vaccine information was significantly associated with internet use (14.7% versus 85.3%; p = 0.02), information from family members (9.4% versus 90.6%; p < 0.01), and the Government/Ministry of Health (37.9% versus 62.1%; p < 0.01). Between healthcare workers and non-health workers, it was significantly associated with internet use (32.2% versus 67.8%; p = 0.03), healthcare providers (32.5% versus 67.5%; p < 0.018), the Government/Ministry of Health (31.1% versus 68.9%; p < 0.01), and scientific articles (44.7% versus 55.3%; p < 0.01). Conclusion The most trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information in northern Uganda were Televisions, Radios, and Newspapers. The trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information were not significantly different between males and females. However, there were significant differences among age groups and occupations of participants with younger age groups (≤ 44 years) and non-healthcare workers having more trust in Televisions, Radios, and Newspapers. Thus, for effective management of an epidemic, there is a need for accurate communication so that misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation in the era of “infodemic” do not disrupt the flow of correct information to communities.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference39 articles.

1. Jaiswal J, LoSchiavo C, Perlman DC. Disinformation, misinformation, and inequality-driven mistrust in the time of COVID-19: lessons unlearned from AIDS denialism. AIDS Behav. 2020;24:2776–80.

2. Wardle C, Derakhshan H. Information disorder: towards an interdisciplinary framework for research and policymaking. Strasbourg Cedex: Council of Europe; 2017.

3. Ahinkorah BO, Ameyaw EK, Hagan JE Jr., Seidu A-A. Thomas Schack. Rising above misinformation or fake news in Africa: another strategy to Control COVID-19 spread. Front Commun.2020;5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2020.00045.

4. Ryder H. COVID-19 Is Only Slowly Reaching Africa. That’s No Surprise. 2020. The Africa report Available online at: https://www.theafricareport.com/24160/covid-19-is-only-slowly-reaching-africa-thats-no-surprise/ (accessed March 24, 2020).

5. Chou W-YS, Oh A, Klein WMP. Addressing health-related misinformation on social media. JAMA. 2018;320:2417–8.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3