Why does health literacy matter, and for whom? Explaining the differentiating impact of health literacy on vaccine attitudes
- PMID: 40212310
- PMCID: PMC11983407
- DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1470654
Why does health literacy matter, and for whom? Explaining the differentiating impact of health literacy on vaccine attitudes
Abstract
Introduction: Vaccination has substantially reduced the spread and severity of infectious diseases. Despite its efficacy, vaccine hesitancy remains a global challenge, often linked to inadequate health literacy and unfavorable vaccine attitudes. Understanding the mechanisms through which health literacy influences vaccine-related attitudes is crucial because it could inform policy interventions aimed at fostering more favorable vaccine attitudes.
Method: The present cross-sectional study of Slovenian adults (n = 3,360) examined the impact of health literacy on vaccine attitudes, focusing on the mediating role of beliefs in vaccine myths and the moderating effects of gender, education, economic status, healthcare training, and self-rated health.
Results: Using mediation and moderated mediation models, we found that health literacy positively influences vaccine attitudes both directly and indirectly by reducing beliefs in myths. The relationship between health literacy and vaccine attitudes is moderated by healthcare training, with stronger positive effect among individuals with such training. Additionally, the negative effect of health literacy on beliefs in myths is stronger among individuals with higher education.
Discussion: Our findings indicate that broader educational inequalities should be addressed to ensure that the positive effect of health literacy on vaccine attitudes is distributed more equitably across groups with different educational levels and fields of expertise.
Keywords: health literacy; sociodemographic; socioeconomic; vaccine attitudes; vaccine hesitancy; vaccine myths.
Copyright © 2025 Lubej and Kirbiš.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy: A Comparison of Sociodemographic and Socioeconomic Predictors with Health Literacy Dimensions.Vaccines (Basel). 2024 Oct 4;12(10):1141. doi: 10.3390/vaccines12101141. Vaccines (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39460308 Free PMC article.
-
The effects of parent's health literacy and health beliefs on vaccine hesitancy.Vaccine. 2023 Mar 24;41(13):2120-2126. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.02.026. Epub 2023 Feb 22. Vaccine. 2023. PMID: 36822968 Free PMC article.
-
Parental Hesitancy on COVID-19 Vaccination for Children Under Five Years in Thailand: Role of Attitudes and Vaccine Literacy.Patient Prefer Adherence. 2023 Mar 10;17:615-628. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S399414. eCollection 2023. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2023. PMID: 36926219 Free PMC article.
-
Perspectives in the Development of Tools to Assess Vaccine Literacy.Vaccines (Basel). 2024 Apr 16;12(4):422. doi: 10.3390/vaccines12040422. Vaccines (Basel). 2024. PMID: 38675804 Free PMC article. Review.
-
COVID-19 vaccine literacy: A scoping review.Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2023 Dec 31;19(1):2176083. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2023.2176083. Epub 2023 Feb 15. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2023. PMID: 36794338 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Aaby A., Friis K., Christensen B., Rowlands G., Maindal H. T. (2017). Health literacy is associated with health behaviour and self-reported health: a large population-based study in individuals with cardiovascular disease. Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 24, 1880–1888. doi: 10.1177/2047487317729538, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Aslan R., Yaltagil E. I., Arslan A., Alim A. (2023). The role of COVID-19 vaccine literacy in the effect of e-health literacy on vaccine attitude. CSJ 44, 474–484. doi: 10.17776/csj.1310731 - DOI
-
- Becker T. E., Robertson M. M., Vandenberg R. J. (2019). Nonlinear transformations in organizational research: possible problems and potential solutions. Organ. Res. Methods 22, 831–866. doi: 10.1177/1094428118775205 - DOI
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources