Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2024 Apr 30:10:e54769.
doi: 10.2196/54769.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis

Tahani Al Rahbeni #  1 , Prakasini Satapathy  2 , Ramaiah Itumalla #  3 , Roy Rillera Marzo  4 , Khalid A L Mugheed  1 , Mahalaqua Nazli Khatib  5 , Shilpa Gaidhane  6 , Quazi Syed Zahiruddin  7 , Ali A Rabaan  8   9   10 , Hayam A Alrasheed  11 , Maha F Al-Subaie  8   12 , Nawal A Al Kaabil  13   14 , Mohammed Alissa  15 , Amani Ahmed A L Ibrahim  16 , Hussain Abdulkhaliq Alsaif  17 , Israa Habeeb Naser  18 , Sarvesh Rustagi  19 , Neelima Kukreti  20 , Arkadiusz Dziedzic #  21
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis

Tahani Al Rahbeni et al. JMIR Public Health Surveill. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Background: The unprecedented emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the development and global distribution of vaccines, making the understanding of global vaccine acceptance and hesitancy crucial to overcoming barriers to vaccination and achieving widespread immunization.

Objective: This umbrella review synthesizes findings from systematic reviews and meta-analyses to provide insights into global perceptions on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy across diverse populations and regions.

Methods: We conducted a literature search across major databases to identify systematic reviews and meta-analysis that reported COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy. The AMSTAR-2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) criteria were used to assess the methodological quality of included systematic reviews. Meta-analysis was performed using STATA 17 with a random effect model. The data synthesis is presented in a table format and via a narrative.

Results: Our inclusion criteria were met by 78 meta-analyses published between 2021 and 2023. Our analysis revealed a moderate vaccine acceptance rate of 63% (95% CI 0.60%-0.67%) in the general population, with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 97.59%). Higher acceptance rates were observed among health care workers and individuals with chronic diseases, at 64% (95% CI 0.57%-0.71%) and 69% (95% CI 0.61%-0.76%), respectively. However, lower acceptance was noted among pregnant women, at 48% (95% CI 0.42%-0.53%), and parents consenting for their children, at 61.29% (95% CI 0.56%-0.67%). The pooled vaccine hesitancy rate was 32% (95% CI 0.25%-0.39%) in the general population. The quality assessment revealed 19 high-quality, 38 moderate-quality, 15 low-quality, and 6 critically low-quality meta-analyses.

Conclusions: This review revealed the presence of vaccine hesitancy globally, emphasizing the necessity for population-specific, culturally sensitive interventions and clear, credible information dissemination to foster vaccine acceptance. The observed disparities accentuate the need for continuous research to understand evolving vaccine perceptions and to address the unique concerns and needs of diverse populations, thereby aiding in the formulation of effective and inclusive vaccination strategies.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42023468363; https://tinyurl.com/2p9kv9cr.

Keywords: COVID-19; child; children; chronic disease; global perceptions; healthcare workers; hesitancy; meta-analysis; parents; patient; patients; perception; pregnant women; random effect model; synthesis; systematic review; umbrella review; vaccine; vaccine acceptance; vaccine hesitancy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) flow diagram illustrating the screening and selection process.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot depicting the pooled acceptance rates for COVID-19 vaccines in the general population. REML: restricted maximum likelihood.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plot showing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy rates for different populations. REML: restricted maximum likelihood.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Park JJH, Mogg R, Smith GE, Nakimuli-Mpungu E, Jehan F, Rayner CR, Condo J, Decloedt EH, Nachega JB, Reis G, Mills EJ. How COVID-19 has fundamentally changed clinical research in global health. The Lancet Global Health. 2021 May;9(5):e711–e720. doi: 10.1016/s2214-109x(20)30542-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Omer SB, Benjamin RM, Brewer NT, Buttenheim AM, Callaghan T, Caplan A, Carpiano RM, Clinton C, DiResta R, Elharake JA, Flowers LC, Galvani AP, Lakshmanan R, Maldonado YA, McFadden SM, Mello MM, Opel DJ, Reiss DR, Salmon DA, Schwartz JL, Sharfstein JM, Hotez PJ. Promoting COVID-19 vaccine acceptance: recommendations from the Lancet Commission on Vaccine Refusal, Acceptance, and Demand in the USA. The Lancet. 2021 Dec;398(10317):2186–2192. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(21)02507-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lazarus JV, Wyka K, White TM, Picchio CA, Gostin LO, Larson HJ, Rabin K, Ratzan SC, Kamarulzaman A, El-Mohandes A. A survey of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance across 23 countries in 2022. Nat Med. 2023 Feb 09;29(2):366–375. doi: 10.1038/s41591-022-02185-4.10.1038/s41591-022-02185-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Health and Medicine Division. Board on Health Sciences Policy. Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice. Committee on Equitable Allocation of Vaccine for the Novel Coronavirus. Gayle H, Foege W, Brown L, Kahn B. Framework for equitable allocation of COVID-19 vaccine. National Academies Press. 2020. [2024-03-09]. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/25917/framework-for-equitable-... . - PubMed
    1. Gozzi N, Chinazzi M, Dean NE, Longini IM, Halloran ME, Perra N, Vespignani A. Estimating the impact of COVID-19 vaccine inequities: a modeling study. Nat Commun. 2023 Jun 06;14(1):3272. doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-39098-w. doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-39098-w.10.1038/s41467-023-39098-w - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms