Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Vaccination | Research

One size doesn’t fit all: methodological reflections in conducting community-based behavioural science research to tailor COVID-19 vaccination initiatives for public health priority populations

Authors: Guillaume Fontaine, Maureen Smith, Tori Langmuir, Karim Mekki, Hanan Ghazal, Elizabeth Estey Noad, Judy Buchan, Vinita Dubey, Andrea M. Patey, Nicola McCleary, Emily Gibson, Mackenzie Wilson, Amjad Alghamyan, Kateryna Zmytrovych, Kimberly Thompson, Jacob Crawshaw, Jeremy M. Grimshaw, Trevor Arnason, Jamie Brehaut, Susan Michie, Melissa Brouwers, Justin Presseau

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2024

Abstract

Background

Promoting the uptake of vaccination for infectious diseases such as COVID-19 remains a global challenge, necessitating collaborative efforts between public health units (PHUs) and communities. Applied behavioural science can play a crucial role in supporting PHUs’ response by providing insights into human behaviour and informing tailored strategies to enhance vaccination uptake. Community engagement can help broaden the reach of behavioural science research by involving a more diverse range of populations and ensuring that strategies better represent the needs of specific communities. We developed and applied an approach to conducting community-based behavioural science research with ethnically and socioeconomically diverse populations to guide PHUs in tailoring their strategies to promote COVID-19 vaccination. This paper presents the community engagement methodology and the lessons learned in applying the methodology.

Methods

The community engagement methodology was developed based on integrated knowledge translation (iKT) and community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles. The study involved collaboration with PHUs and local communities in Ontario, Canada to identify priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination, understand factors influencing vaccine uptake and co-design strategies tailored to each community to promote vaccination. Community engagement was conducted across three large urban regions with individuals from Eastern European communities, African, Black, and Caribbean communities and low socioeconomic neighbourhoods.

Results

We developed and applied a seven-step methodology for conducting community-based behavioural science research: (1) aligning goals with system-level partners; (2) engaging with PHUs to understand priorities; (3) understanding community strengths and dynamics; (4) building relationships with each community; (5) establishing partnerships (community advisory groups); (6) involving community members in the research process; and (7) feeding back and interpreting research findings. Research partnerships were successfully established with members of prioritized communities, enabling recruitment of participants for theory-informed behavioural science interviews, interpretation of findings, and co-design of targeted recommendations for each PHU to improve COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Lessons learned include the importance of cultural sensitivity and awareness of sociopolitical context in tailoring community engagement, being agile to address the diverse and evolving priorities of PHUs, and building trust to achieve effective community engagement.

Conclusion

Effective community engagement in behavioural science research can lead to more inclusive and representative research. The community engagement approach developed and applied in this study acknowledges the diversity of communities, recognizes the central role of PHUs, and can help in addressing complex public health challenges.

Available only for authorised users

WHO. COVID-19 weekly epidemiological update: edition 155 published 10 August 2023. 2023. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/weekly-epidemiological-update-on-covid-19---10-august-2023. Accessed 11 Mar 2024.

Delardas OKK, Pontikos PN, Giannos P. Socio-economic impacts and challenges of the Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19): an updated review. Sustainability. 2022;14(15):9699.

Verschuur JKE, Hall JW. Global economic impacts of COVID-19 lockdown measures stand out in high-frequency shipping data. PLoS One. 2021;16(4):e0248818.

Osterrieder ACG, Pan-Ngum W, Cheah PK, Cheah PK, Peerawaranun P, Silan M, Orazem M, Perkovic K, Groselj U, Schneiders ML. Economic and social impacts of COVID-19 and public health measures: results from an anonymous online survey in Thailand, Malaysia, the UK, Italy and Slovenia. BMJ Open. 2021;11(7):e046863.

Yates TSA, Razieh C, Banerjee A, Chudasama Y, Davies MJ, Gillies C, Islam N, Lawson C, Mirkes E, Zaccardi F. A population-based cohort study of obesity, ethnicity and COVID-19 mortality in 12.6 million adults in England. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):624.

Bilal UJJ, Schnake-Mahl A, Murphy K, Momplaisir F. Racial/ethnic and neighbourhood social vulnerability disparities in COVID-19 testing positivity, hospitalization, and in-hospital mortality in a large hospital system in Pennsylvania: a prospective study of electronic health records. Lancet Reg Health Am. 2022;10:100220.

Robinson PCYJ. Racial and ethnic differences in COVID-19 outcomes: a call to action. Lancet Rheumatol. 2022;4(7):e455-7.

Alcendor DJ. Racial disparities-associated COVID-19 mortality among minority populations in the US. J Clin Med. 2020;9(8):2442.

Harrison EM, Docherty AB, Barr B, Buchan I, Carson G, Drake TM, Dunning J, Fairfield CJ, Gamble C, Green CA, Griffiths C, Halpin S, Hardwick HE, Ho A, Holden KA, Hollinghurst J, Horby PW, Jackson C, Katikireddi SV, Knight S, Lyons RA, MacMahon J, Mclean KA, Merson L, Murphy D, Nguyen-Van-Tam JS, Norman L, Olliaro PL, Pareek M, Piroddi R, Pius R, Read JM, Russell CD, Sattar N, Shaw CA, Sheikh A, Sinha IP, Swann O, Taylor-Robinson D, Thomas D, Turtle L, Openshaw PJM, Baillie JK, Semple MG, Investigators, ISARIC4C. Ethnicity and outcomes from COVID-19: the ISARIC CCP-UK prospective observational cohort study of hospitalised patients. SSRN. Preprint posted online June 17, 2020. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3618215.

10.

Sze S, Pan D, Nevill CR, Gray LJ, Martin CA, Nazareth J, Pareek M. Ethnicity and clinical outcomes in COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2020;19:100630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100630.

11.

Mathur R, Rentsch CT, Morton CE, Hulme WJ, Schultze A, MacKenna B, Eggo RM, Bhaskaran K, Wong AY, Williamson EJ, Forbes H. Ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation, intensive care unit admission, and death in 17 million adults in England: an observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform. Lancet. 2021;397(10286):1711–24.

12.

WHO. Considerations for implementing and adjusting public health and social measures in the context of COVID-19. 2023. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/366669/WHO-2019-nCoV-Adjusting-PH-measures-2023.1-eng.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed 11 Mar 2024.

13.

Ayouni I, Maatoug J, Dhouib W, Zammit N, Fredj SB, Ghammam R, Ghannem H. Effective public health measures to mitigate the spread of COVID-19: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):1–4.

14.

Talic S, Shah S, Wild H, Gasevic D, Maharaj A, Ademi Z, Ilic D. Effectiveness of public health measures in reducing the incidence of covid-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and covid-19 mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2021;375:e068302. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-068302.

15.

Hartley DMPE. Public health interventions for COVID-19: emerging evidence and implications for an evolving public health crisis. JAMA. 2020;323(19):1908–9.

16.

Abbas AH. Politicizing COVID-19 vaccines in the press: a critical discourse analysis. Int J Semiot Law. 2022;35(3):1167–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-021-09857-3.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Hart PS, Chinn S, Soroka S. Politicization and polarization in COVID-19 news coverage. Sci Commun. 2020;42(5):679–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547020950735.CrossRefPubMedCentral

18.

Stroebe W, vanDellen MR, Abakoumkin G, et al. Politicization of COVID-19 health-protective behaviors in the United States: longitudinal and cross-national evidence. PLoS One. 2021;16(10):e0256740. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256740.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

World Health Organization. Behavioural and social drivers of vaccination: tools and practical guidance for achieving high uptake. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240049680. Accessed 11 Mar 2024.

20.

Ike N, Burns KE, Nascimento H, et al. Examining factors impacting acceptance of COVID-19 countermeasures among structurally marginalised Canadians. Glob Public Health. 2023;18(1):2263525. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2023.2263525.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Wallerstein N, Oetzel JG, Sanchez-Youngman S, et al. Engage for equity: a long-term study of community-based participatory research and community-engaged research practices and outcomes. Health Educ Behav. 2020;47(3):380–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198119897075.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Wallerstein NB, Duran B. Using community-based participatory research to address health disparities. Health Promot Pract. 2006;7(3):312–23.

23.

Farina M, Lavazza A. Advocating for greater inclusion of marginalized and forgotten populations in COVID19 vaccine rollouts. Int J Public Health. 2021;66:1604036. https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2021.1604036.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Holder-Dixon AR, Adams OR, Cobb TL, et al. Medical avoidance among marginalized groups: the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. J Behav Med. 2022;45(5):760–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-022-00332-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Heymann DLSN. COVID-19: what is next for public health? Lancet. 2020;395(10224):542–5.

26.

Smith RW JT, Sandhu HS, Pinto AD, O'Neill M, Di Ruggiero E, Pawa J, Rosella L, Allin S. Centralization and integration of public health systems: perspectives of public health leaders on factors facilitating and impeding COVID-19 responses in three Canadian provinces. Health Policy. 2022;127:9-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.11.011.

27.

Norheim OF, Abi-Rached JM, Bright LK, Bærøe K, Ferraz OL, Gloppen S, Voorhoeve A. Difficult trade-offs in response to COVID-19: the case for open and inclusive decision making. Nat Med. 2021;27(1):10–3.

28.

McGuire ALAM, Davis FD, Erwin C, Harter TD, Jagsi R, Klitzman R, Macauley R, Racine E, Wolf SM, Wynia M. Ethical challenges arising in the COVID-19 pandemic: an overview from the Association of Bioethics Program Directors (ABPD) task force. Am J Bioeth. 2020;20(7):15–27.

29.

Canadian Public Health Association (CPHA). Strengthening public health systems in Canada. 2022. https://www.cpha.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/advocacy/strengthen/strengthening-ph-systems-brief-e.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2024.

30.

Escandón KRA, Bogoch II, Murray EJ, Escandón K, Popescu SV, Kindrachuk J. COVID-19 false dichotomies and a comprehensive review of the evidence regarding public health, COVID-19 symptomatology, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, mask wearing, and reinfection. BMC Infect Dis. 2021;21(1):710.

31.

Sachs JDKS, Aknin L, et al. The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet. 2022;400(10359):1224–80.

32.

Hallsworth M. A manifesto for applying behavioural science. Nat Hum Behav. 2023;7:310–22. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01555-3.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Noone C, Warner N, Byrne M, Durand H, Lavoie KL, McGuire BE, McSharry J, Meade O, Morrissey E, Molloy G, O’Connor L, Toomey E. Investigating and evaluating evidence of the behavioural determinants of adherence to social distancing measures: a protocol for a scoping review of COVID-19 research. HRB Open Res. 2020;3:46.

34.

Stojanovic J, Boucher VG, Gagné M, Gupta S, Joyal-Desmarais K, Paduano S, Aburub A, Sheinfeld Gorin SN, Kassianos AP, Ribeiro PAB, Bacon SL, Lavoie KL. Global trends and correlates of covid-19 vaccination hesitancy: findings from the iCARE study. Vaccines. 2021;661:1–13.

35.

Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, et al. Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14(1):26–33. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2004.011155.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Michie S, Richardson M, Johnston M, et al. The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Ann Behav Med. 2013;46(1):81–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-013-9486-6.CrossRefPubMed

37.

OECD. Behavioural insights and public policy: lessons from around the world. Paris: 2017.

38.

Crawshaw J, Konnyu K, Castillo G, et al. Factors affecting COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and uptake among the general public: a living behavioural science evidence synthesis (v5, Aug 31st, 2021). McMaster Health Forum. 2021. https://www.mcmasterforum.org/docs/default-source/product-documents/living-evidence-syntheses/covid-19-living-evidence-synthesis-4.5---factors-affecting-covid-19-vaccination-acceptance-and-uptake-among-the-general-public.pdf?sfvrsn=33dc4261_5. Accessed 11 Mar 2024.

39.

Gilmore BNR, Tchetchia A, De Claro V, Mago E, Lopes C, Bhattacharyya S. Community engagement for COVID-19 prevention and control: a rapid evidence synthesis. BMJ Glob Health. 2020;5(10):e003188.

40.

National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Rapid review: what were the public’s experiences accessing and interacting with public health information during the COVID-19 pandemic? 2023. https://www.nccmt.ca/pdfs/res/health-information. Accessed 11 Mar 2024.

41.

Jagosh J, Bush PL, Salsberg J, et al. A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:725. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1949-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Lucero JE, Wright KW, Reese A. Trust development in CBPR partnerships. In: Wallerstein NB, Duran B, Oetzel J, Mikler M, editors. Community-based participatory research in health: advancing social and health equity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2017.

43.

Shalowitz MU, Isacco A, Barquin N, Clark-Kauffman E, Delger P, Nelson D, Wagenaar KA. Community-based participatory research: a review of the literature with strategies for community engagement. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2009;30(4):350–61. https://doi.org/10.1097/dbp.0b013e3181b0ef14.

44.

Schiavo R. What is true community engagement and why it matters (now more than ever). J Commun Healthc. 2021;14(2):91–2. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538068.2021.1935569.CrossRef

45.

Jull J, Giles A, Graham ID. Community-based participatory research and integrated knowledge translation: advancing the co-creation of knowledge. Implement Sci. 2017;12:1–9.

46.

Graham ID, Kothari A, McCutcheon C. Moving knowledge into action for more effective practice, programmes and policy: protocol for a research programme on integrated knowledge translation. Implement Sci. 2018;13(1):1–15.

47.

Viswanathan M, Ammerman A, Eng E, Garlehner G, Lohr KN, Griffith D, Whitener L. Community‐based participatory research: assessing the evidence: summary. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ). 2004;99:1-8.

48.

Wilson E, Kenny A, Dickson-Swift V. Ethical challenges in community-based participatory research: a scoping review. Qual Health Res. 2018;28(2):189–99.

49.

Nguyen T, Graham ID, Mrklas KJ, et al. How does integrated knowledge translation (IKT) compare to other collaborative research approaches to generating and translating knowledge? Learning from experts in the field. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020;18(1):35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-0539-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Jagosh J, Macaulay AC, Pluye P, Salsberg JON, Bush PL, Henderson JIM, Greenhalgh T. Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Q. 2012;90(2):311-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2012.00665.x.

51.

NICE. Community engagement to increase childhood immunisations. London; 2012.

52.

Habib MA, Soofi S, Cousens S, Anwar S, ul Haque N, Ahmed I, Bhutta ZA. Community engagement and integrated health and polio immunisation campaigns in conflict-affected areas of Pakistan: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet Global Health. 2017;5(6):e593-603. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2214-109x(17)30184-5.

53.

Jain M, Shisler S, Lane C, Bagai A, Brown E, Engelbert M, Parsekar SS. Use of community engagement interventions to improve child immunisation in low‐and middle‐income countries: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Campbell Syst Rev. 2022;18(3):e1253. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1253.

54.

Capurro G, Maier R, Tustin J, Jardine CG, Driedger SM. The spokesperson matters: evaluating the crisis communication styles of primary spokespersons when presenting COVID-19 modeling data across three jurisdictions in Canada. J Risk Res. 2022;25(11–12):1395–412.

55.

Jennings W, Stoker G, Bunting H, et al. Lack of trust, conspiracy beliefs, and social media use predict COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Vaccines. 2021;9(6):593.

56.

McMillan G, van Allen Z, Presseau J. Understanding the role of personal risk perceptions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a rapid behavioural science evidence synthesis. McMaster Health Forum. 2022. https://www.mcmasterforum.org/docs/default-source/product-documents/rapid-responses/riskperceptionsarosscovid-19pandemic.pdf?sfvrsn=7da9dd7f_5. Accessed 11 Mar 2024.

57.

Castillo G, Wilson M, Smith M, Grimshaw JM, Presseau J. COVID-19 vaccine mandates and their relationship with vaccination intention, psychological reactance, and trust: a rapid behavioural evidence synthesis. McMaster Health Forum. 2022. https://www.mcmasterforum.org/docs/default-source/product-documents/rapid-responses/covid-19-vaccine-mandates-and-their-relationship-with-vaccination-intention-psychological-reactance-and-trust.pdf?sfvrsn=5eb9d7e5_5. Accessed 11 Mar 2024.

58.

Langmuir T, Wilson M, McCleary N, et al. Strategies and resources used by public health units to encourage COVID-19 vaccination among priority groups: a behavioural science-informed review of three urban centres in Canada. ResearchSquare. Preprint posted online September 14, 2023. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3263714/v1.

59.

Hamilton CB, Hoens AM, Backman CL, McKinnon AM, McQuitty S, English K, Li LC. An empirically based conceptual framework for fostering meaningful patient engagement in research. Health Expect. 2018;21(1):396–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12635.CrossRefPubMed

60.

De Weger E, Van Vooren N, Luijkx KG, Baan CA, Drewes HW. Achieving successful community engagement: a rapid realist review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3090-1.CrossRef

61.

Cane J, O’Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7:37. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

62.

Francis JJ, Johnston M, Robertson C, et al. What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies. Psychol Health. 2010;25(10):1229–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440903194015.CrossRefPubMed

63.

Weijer C, Emanuel EJ. Ethics. Protecting communities in biomedical research. Science. 2000;289(5482):1142–4. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5482.1142.CrossRefPubMed

64.

Minkler M. Ethical challenges for the “outside” researcher in community-based participatory research. Health Educ Behav. 2004;31(6):684–97.

65.

Teresa RM, Valentina P, Marcello DP, et al. Community-based participatory research to engage disadvantaged communities: Levels of engagement reached and how to increase it. A systematic review. Health Policy. 2023;137:104905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2023.104905.CrossRef

66.

Rodriguez Espinosa P, Verney SP. The Underutilization of Community-based participatory research in psychology: a systematic review. Am J Community Psychol. 2021;67(3–4):312–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12469.CrossRefPubMed

67.

Duea SR, Zimmerman EB, Vaughn LM, Dias S, Harris J. A guide to selecting participatory research methods based on project and partnership goals. J Particip Res Methods. 2022;3(1). https://doi.org/10.35844/001c.32605.

Title: One size doesn’t fit all: methodological reflections in conducting community-based behavioural science research to tailor COVID-19 vaccination initiatives for public health priority populations
Authors: Guillaume Fontaine
Maureen Smith
Tori Langmuir
Karim Mekki
Hanan Ghazal
Elizabeth Estey Noad
Judy Buchan
Vinita Dubey
Andrea M. Patey
Nicola McCleary
Emily Gibson
Mackenzie Wilson
Amjad Alghamyan
Kateryna Zmytrovych
Kimberly Thompson
Jacob Crawshaw
Jeremy M. Grimshaw
Trevor Arnason
Jamie Brehaut
Susan Michie
Melissa Brouwers
Justin Presseau
Publication date: 01-12-2024
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Vaccination
Public Health
COVID-19
COVID-19 Vaccination
Published in: BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18270-x

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

One size doesn’t fit all: methodological reflections in conducting community-based behavioural science research to tailor COVID-19 vaccination initiatives for public health priority populations

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Dose-response association of obesity and risk of mental health among tehranian residents: result of a cross-sectional study

Prioritization of ethical concerns regarding HIV molecular epidemiology by public health practitioners and researchers

Living in urban or rural environments affect the sleep quality of the elderly in Bushehr (Southern Iran): emphasizing the active and inactive of the elderly

The effects of dietary diversity on health status among the older adults: an empirical study from China

Perception of pregnant individuals, health providers and decision makers on interventions to cease substance consumption during pregnancy: a qualitative study

The sexual and reproductive healthcare challenges when dealing with female migrants and refugees in low and middle-income countries (a qualitative evidence synthesis)