Skip to main content
Download PDF

Willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccines, associated factors and reasons for not taking a vaccine: a cross sectional study among persons aged 13–80 years in Wakiso, Central Uganda

BMC Infectious Diseases volume 24, Article number: 391 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Vaccination has been recommended as one of the approaches for the control of COVID-19 pandemic. However, adequate vaccine coverage is critical to the effectiveness of the vaccine at population level. Data on acceptability of the vaccine in Ugandan urban areas are limited. This study examined the prevalence, factors associated with willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine including reasons for not taking COVID-19 vaccine in a predominantly urban population of Wakiso, central Uganda.

Methods

Data were obtained from a cross-sectional study conducted between March 1st, 2021 and September 30th, 2021 in the urban population-based cohort of the Africa Medical and behavioral Sciences Organization (AMBSO). A Multivariable modified Poisson regression analysis was used to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals of willingness to accept the COVID-19 vaccine.

Results

A total of 1,903 participants were enrolled in this study; 61% of whom were females. About 63% of participants indicated their willingness to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. Persons aged 13–19 years (aPR = 0.79; [95% CI: 0.74, 0.84]) or 20-29years (aPR = 0.93; [95% CI: 0.88, 0.98]) were less likely to accept the vaccine compared to persons aged 40–49 years. Persons with post-primary level of education (aPR = 1.05; [95% CI: 1.02, 1.09]) were more likely to accept the vaccine compared to persons with primary level of education. Additionally, students or individuals working in government (aPR = 1.13; [95% CI: 1.04, 1.23]) were more likely to accept the vaccine compared to individuals doing construction and Mechanic work as their main occupation. Reported reasons for not taking a COVID-19 vaccine included; concerns about side effects of the vaccine 154(57.0%), 64(23.7%) did not think the vaccines were effective, while 32(11.9%) did not like the vaccines.

Conclusion

A substantial proportion of individuals were not willing to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. Health education campaigns on vaccination within urban communities could help reduce COVID-19 vaccine misconceptions in the urban populations more especially the young and persons with low levels of formal education.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a respiratory illness caused by Novel Corona Virus also known as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus 2 (SARS COV-2) [1]. The control of the disease is still through preventive measures including but not limited to hand hygiene (frequent hand washing and sanitization), keeping social distance, use of face masks and vaccination [2, 3]. In Uganda, a population-based study reported a high uptake of COVID-19 preventive measures in urban settings [4]. This could potentially explain why Uganda had lower mortality rates due to COVID-19 infections compared to other countries in the world.

Globally, by 31st January 2023, 753 million COVID-19 confirmed cases and 6.8 million deaths were reported [5]. While Africa, had 9.4 million confirmed cases and 175,247 deaths, with Uganda reporting 170,233 cases and 3,630 deaths [5]. In Nigeria, between 3rd Jan 2020 and 14th June 2023, 266,675 cases and 3,155 deaths were reported [6]. Additionally, a total of 171,653 cases and 1,462 deaths were reported during the same period in Ghana [7]. Vaccination is very important in prevention and controlling the spread of infectious diseases including COVID-19 infections [8, 9]. However, for vaccination campaigns to be effective, a critical mass of the population must be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity [10,11,12]. Several COVID-19 vaccines have been developed for example AstraZeneca, Moderna, Pfizer, Johnson and Johnson to prevent and limit spread of COVID-19 infections [13]. These vaccines were approved and recommended for use by WHO and Uganda like many other countries adopted and rolled out vaccination campaigns. As of January 2023, WHO Statistics indicated that, 13 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines had been administered globally [14]. Sadly, only 28.21% of Africa’s population had been fully vaccinated this is similar to what was observed in Uganda, indicating that only 28.34% of the Population had received at least two doses of COVID 19 Vaccines [5].

Different studies have reported varying COVID-19 Vaccine acceptance rates across the world [15,16,17]. A study conducted in Ethiopia among college students showed that 34.2% were willing to take up COVID-19 vaccines [18]. Another study in northwest Ethiopia reported a 55% willingness to take up COVID-19 vaccines among people with comorbidities [19]. Furthermore, a study conducted among students at the Islamic university in Uganda indicated that only 20.4% of the students were willing to accept COVID 19 vaccines [20]. These statistics indicate low rates of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake in Uganda and Africa at large. However, a study conducted in Canada among older persons reported a reasonably high prevalence (84%) of willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccines [21].

Potential factors that have been reported to be associated with willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccination include; gender, marital status, education level, occupation, exposure to COVID-19 infections and media such as watching television [10, 18]. Being a health care worker, having lost a loved one due to COVID-19 infections, having good knowledge about the COVID-19 vaccine, perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 infections and the effectiveness of the vaccine have also been shown to be associated with willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccines [21, 22]. A systematic review reported different reasons for vaccine hesitation or unwillingness to receive the vaccine including; concerns with vaccine safety and side effects, lack of trust for pharmaceutical industries and misinformation or conflicting information from the media [23]. Similar findings were found by a qualitative study in Germany which indicated that Low perceived benefit of vaccination, low perceived risk of contracting COVID-19, health concerns, lack of information, systemic mistrust and spiritual or religious reasons were the main reasons for not taking a COVID-19 vaccine [24]. However, this systematic review did not only include a single Ugandan study [25], but also, the said study focused on medical students leaving out the bigger population which this study addresses. The other reasons for vaccine hesitancy include; COVID-19 is not a serious illness, costs associated with the vaccine (such as office visit costs or vaccine administration fees) and distrust in COVID-19 vaccines [26,27,28]. However, many of these studies have been conducted in high income countries like Spain, Malaysia and USA which may not be a true representation of Uganda. Therefore, this study aimed at examining the prevalence, factors associated with willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine and the reasons for not taking a COVID-19 vaccine in a predominantly urban population of Wakiso, central Uganda.

Methods

Study setting and design

This was a cross-sectional study conducted in the urban settings of Wakiso, central Uganda, in the existing Africa Medical & Behavioral Sciences Organization Population Health Surveillance (APHS) cohort that is being implemented by AMBSO. APHS is an open urban population-based cohort which enrolls about 5,000 consenting adults aged 13–80 years in the three communities of Wakiso, central Uganda and these communities include; Kazo, Lukwanga and Sentema. The AMBSO-PHS aims have been previously described through the APHS cohort profile [4, 29].

Variables

The main variable of this study was willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine. This was determined by asking all participants if they were willing to accept COVID-19 vaccine (Would you take the COVID-19 vaccine if it is available for your age group? “YES”/”NO”). Participants whose responses were “NO”, this was regarded as unwillingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine. We investigated reasons for not takingCOVID-19 vaccine among persons aged 13–80 years (What are your reasons for not taking the vaccine? ). The participants were asked different questions to assess reasons for not taking COVID-19 vaccine included; people’s concerns about side effects of the vaccines? (“‘YES/NO”), some people are not worried about getting seriously ill as a result of COVID-19 infection? (“‘YES/NO”), some people think COVID-19 vaccines are not effective? (“‘YES/NO”), some people did not like COVID-19vaccines? (“‘YES/NO”), other people are allergic to COVID-19 vaccines? (“‘YES/NO”), some people do not have time to get vaccinated? (“‘YES/NO”), other people think that they are not eligible for COVID-19 vaccines? (“‘YES/NO”), some people have other conspiracy theories? for example vaccines are not available (“‘YES/NO”). Independent variables included; age, sex, marital status, education, occupation, pregnancy status, and presence of chronic disease like HIV/AIDs, diabetes.

Study population

The study population included all persons aged 13–80 years in the mapped APHS communities of Wakiso, Central Uganda.

Inclusion criteria

A person was included in the study if him/her; was aged 13–80 years and consented to be interviewed. All participants of the APHS cohort aged 13–80 years with non-missing data on willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine were included in the analysis.

Exclusion criteria

All participants who were incapacitated at the time of interview (data collection) were excluded. This is because given such situation or status could potentially limit their ability to provide informed consent to participate in the study. All participants with missing data on willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccines were also excluded from the analysis.

Sampling procedure

This study used APHS data for round three (R3). The APHS sampling procedure has been previously described [4, 29] and this was also similar to other Population based surveys conducted elsewhere [30]. In brief, multistage sampling was employed to select the different communities. The APHS study areas were selected through community mapping exercise and comparing the population structure of areas with different distances from urban centres and cultivation [29]. The overall objective was to select representative sample of households in the different communities. In each household, all persons aged 13 years and above were considered as potential participants for the annual survey.

Data collection

Prior to data collection, census activities were conducted. This involved household enumeration of eligible participants, obtaining information on socio-demographic characteristics such as sex, age, relationship of household members to head of the household, marital status, and residence status of each household member censused (how long have you lived in that community?). After census activities, all participants that were eligible for survey based on age (13 years and above), were then invited for a nearby venue to their household called a “hub”. This is where APHS annual survey/data collection took place, and this was done for approximately 1–2 months per community.

At a data collection hub, trained research assistants collected the data and the interviews were conducted in a private environment that suited free expression of ideas by the participants. Written informed consent was obtained before any data collection activities. The trained research assistants would first introduce themselves before consenting. Participants were given time to introduce themselves and this was done purposely to build a positive relationship with the participant and hence this improved on rapport building. Besides that, the interviews were also conducted by same sex interviewers, this increased confidence of the participants and hence they were free to open up more especially on sensitive questions. The study tools (consent forms and questionnaires) were translated into the local language (Luganda) and interviews were either conducted in Luganda (local language) or English.

The study objectives were thoroughly explained to the participants in details before obtaining their consent by signature or thumbprint. Efforts were made not to hurry the participants while maintaining a time-period of one hour and a half hour. Biological samples were drawn including anthropometrics measurements for vitals. The interviewers carried laptops to the field for data collection. The validated questionnaire was uploaded on laptops and ensured that all questions have been tackled before submitting the laptops to designated staff (editors) for editing. Upon ending the interview, the research assistants orally thanked the participants in the most appropriate language as determined by the interviewers. The editors were charged with responsibility of ensuring that there is accuracy, consistency and completeness of the data. Training and re-training of research assistants in the study protocol was done to ensure adherence with the study guidelines to avoid data collection biases.

Sample size

The study sample size was 1,903 participants, this was determined based on the available captured data in the APHS. However, this study would require a sample size of 509 participants using Kish Leslie formula (1965) for cross-sectional studies. A precision of 5%, standard normal deviation corresponding to 95% confidence interval (1.96), the estimated prevalence (70%) of willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine in Uganda [31]. Considering a design effect, the sample size was multiplied by 1.5 to get 485 with a nonresponse rate of 5%.

Data analysis

We analyzed the data using Stata version 15 (64-bit) software. Prevalence of willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine hesitation were determined through a cross-tabulation. Descriptive and univariate analysis were performed to describe how the variables were distributed. The frequency distributions for categorical variables were computed. We analyzed continuous variables using mean (with the standard deviation), mode and median (with the range). Bivariate analysis was conducted between each independent factor against willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine to determine associations. From the unadjusted analysis, variables with p-values < 0.2 including biologically plausible variables were included in the multivariable model. All variables with p-values < 0.05 were statistically significant at 95% confidence intervals for the association between factors and willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine. We further conducted sensitivity analysis and included some of the factors that have been previously shown by other studies to be associated with willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine. These factors included; sex, marital status, age and presence of chronic disease [32,33,34]. We also adjusted the cut-off p-value to less than 0.05 for selection of variables during multivariable analysis.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics and other health related factors of the study Participants. This study included 1,903 participants and the mean age of participants was 30.9 (SD = 14.0) years (Table 1). Of the 1,903 study participants, (1,170 [61.5%]) were females; (1,015 [53.4%]) were single. Most participants (984 [51.6%]) had post-primary education while, (858 [45.1%]) had primary education level, and only (61 [3.2%]) had no formal education. Occupation groups included traders (365 [19.2%]), housework (473 [24.9%]), agriculture (516 [27.1%]), construction & mechanics workers (103 [5.4%]), students or government staff (324[17.0%]) and other occupations (122 [6.4%]). About (153 [8.0%]) of participants were HIV-positive while majority of the participants (1,750 [91.96%]) were HIV negative and only 62(3.3%) of the women were pregnant.

Table 1 Characteristics of respondents (N = 1,903)
Full size table

Prevalence of willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine

In this study, the prevalence of willingness to accept COVID-19 was 1,206 (63.4%) while unwillingness to take COVID-19 vaccine was 697(36.6%) as shown in the Fig. 1. Of the eleven reasons for not taking COVID-19 vaccine that were reported in Table 2, majority of the participants (57%) had concerns about side effects resulting from the vaccines. About 24% of the participants did not think COVID-19 vaccines were effective, approximately 12% of the participants did not like the COVID-19 vaccines. Besides that, about 9% of the participants were not willing to accept COVID-19 vaccines because of other conspiracy theories. Additionally, about 7% of participants self-reported that they were not worried about getting seriously ill from the COVID-19 infection while less than 1% of the participants reported that long distance to the health facility or COVID-19 vaccination site was the reason for not taking a COVID-19 vaccine.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Patient selection and exclusion flow chart. Abbreviation: PC: control group; LD: low-dose group; MD: medium-dose group; HD: high-dose group; UD: ultra-high-dose group

Full size image
Table 2 Showing reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among persons aged at least 13 years (N = 270)
Full size table

In a bivariate analysis (Table 3), several factors were associated with willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine for example, participants aged 13–19 years were less likely to accept COVID-19 vaccine compared to those aged 40-49years; (cPR = 0.83; [95% CI: 0.78, 0.87]).Additionally, participants who were unmarried (cPR = 0.94; [95% CI: 0.91, 0.97]) were less likely to accept COVID-19 vaccine compared to those who were married. Participants with post-primary level of education were more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccine compared to those with primary level of education (cPR = 1.05; [95% CI: 21.02, 1.09]). Other factors that had higher likelihood of willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine included; participants with non-formal education (cPR = 1.11; [95% CI: 1.02, 1.22]) and participants with other occupations (cPR = 1.11; [95% CI: 1.01, 1.22]). Lastly, sex, presence of chronic disease, and pregnancy status were not associated with willingness to accept COVID-19 Vaccine.

Table 3 Bivariable and Multivariate results showing factors associated with willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine
Full size table

In the multivariable analysis, as per the set criteria, some variables that were not significant at bivariate analysis were included in the final model and these include; comordity and pregnancy status.

In a multivariable model, young persons aged 13–19 years (aPR = 0.79; [95% CI: 0.74, 0.84]) or persons aged 20–29 years (aPR = 0.93; [95% CI: 0.88, 0.98]) were less likely to accept the vaccine compared to the persons aged 40–49 years. Interestingly, participants with post-primary level of education (aPR = 1.05; [95% CI: 1.02, 1.09]) were more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccine compared to persons with primary level of education. Additionally, students or government staff (aPR = 1.13; [95% CI: 1.04, 1.23] were more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccines compared to persons involved in construction or mechanic work. We found similar results during sensitivity analysis after adjusting for sex, presence of chronic disease and lowering the p-value to 0.05 when selecting variables for multivariable model (Additional file 1: Table 1).

Discussion

About 63% of participants self-reported their willingness to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. This prevalence is slightly lower than the prevalence (72.7%) that was reported by Muhindo et al. 2022, conducted in Kampala Uganda among People living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV) [35]. This could be attributed to the positive belief that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and beneficial to PLHIV. A phone survey conducted in Uganda reported that 91% were willing to accept COVID-19 vaccination [36]. The higher acceptance rate reported in this study that is relative to our study could be explained by the method of data collection that is to say, using phones to collect the data. Participants who owned mobile phones could have easily accessed information about COVID-19 vaccines and hence influencing their willingness to take a vaccine compared to those who did not own phones hence affecting the outcome of interest. Conversely, this study’s prevalence was higher than the prevalence of 37.3% reported by Kanyike et al., 2021 conducted in Uganda among medical students [25]. The low prevalence in this study could be attributed to the low willingness to utilize healthcare services amongst students [37]. Additionally, low proportions of willingness to accept the COVID-19 vaccine were reported in South Africa (57%) [38] and Ethiopia (54.6%) [22]. The possible explanation for the low willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccination in Ethiopia could be attributed to the differences in methodologies, our study utilized a prospective community-based approach while the Ethiopian study was a hospital-based survey. Low willingness to accept vaccination were reported in Nigeria and Ethiopia (54.6%, and 33.7%), respectively [22, 39]. The Nigerian study was conducted among the tertiary institutions compared to our study that was conducted among the general population. Therefore, this could have affected the outcome of interest (willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine). Another study conducted in Gondor city of Ethiopia among college students reported that, only 32% of the participants were willing to receive COVID-19 vaccine [18]. Furthermore, a study conducted in South Western Ethiopia reported that, only 29% of the participants were willing to receive COVID-19 vaccine [40]. The relatively high willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine in our study could be attributed to the vigorous campaigns by the government of Uganda to promote COVID-19 vaccination [41]. However, several studies have reported higher proportions of willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine compared to our study findings for instance Ghana (70%) [42], Nigeria (85.29%) [43], and Canada (84%) [21]. The relatively lower prevalence of willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine, observed in our study relative to the above studies. This could be attributed to the differences in methodologies and the socio-demographic characteristics of population studied. The overall rate of respondent’s willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccines (63%) from our findings was consistent with a systematic review. This revealed that the rate of participants’ willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine ranged from 27.7–91.3% [44]. We examined some of the reasons for not taking COVID-19 vaccine among persons aged 13–80 years. Majority of the participants reported concerns about side effects resulting from the COVID-19 vaccines. This finding is in line with studies conducted in Uganda and Spain [26, 45]. Besides that, our findings also revealed that vaccines were not liked and that these vaccines could instead infect them with COVID-19 virus. We found consistent findings from rural Uganda [46] and Malaysia [47]. Furthermore, our findings indicated that some people were not willing to accept COVID-19 vaccine because they had not contracted COVID-19 infection in the past six months. Therefore, they thought they were ineligible for COVD-19 vaccine uptake. This finding agrees with an online survey conducted among US adults [28]. The USA study used similar methodologies which could explain the consistency of results.

Persons aged 13–19 years (aPR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.74, 0.84) or 20–29 years (aPR = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.88, 0.98) were less likely to accept the vaccine compared to persons aged 40–49 years. This finding is consistent with findings from studies conducted in Africa that reported that young participants were less likely to accept COVID-19 vaccine compared to older participants [40, 48,49,50]. The possible explanation could be that, young people perceived themselves to be safer and not at risk of COVID-19 infections as compared to the ageing population [49, 50]. We found that, persons with post-primary level of education (aPR = 1.05; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.09) were more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccine compared to those with primary level of education. This is consistent with findings from other studies conducted in other settings [18, 40, 51, 52]. The possible explanation could be that, high level of education is positively correlated with knowledge. Therefore, persons with high level of education are more likely to be knowledgeable and aware of COVID-19 preventive strategies such as vaccination compared to those with non-formal education. Our study reported that, students or government staff were more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccine (aPR = 1.13; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.23) compared to those doing construction and mechanic work as their main occupation. This finding is consistent with studies conducted elsewhere [1, 40]. The possible explanation could be attributed to ease with accessibility to information amongst government workers or students as opposed to construction/mechanic workers. Although variables such as marital status, sex and comorbidity were not associated with willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine. These variables have been previously associated with willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine [34, 53]. The possible explanation could be due to differences in the study methodology and socio-demographic characteristics of population studied.

Strengths and limitations

This study is not without limitations, although the cross-sectional nature of this study was the ideal method since both the dependent and independent variables could be measured at the same time. This type of design cannot assess the temporal relationship and therefore, more advanced designs could close this gap. Additionally, this study being purely quantitative, it could not explore beliefs, attitudes and perceptions about reasons for not taking COVID-19 vaccine, hence future qualitative studies are recommended.

Conclusion

In this study, over 30% of the population were not taking COVID-19 vaccine. Younger persons were less likely to accept COVID-19 vaccine while individuals with post-primary level of education, and students or government workers were more likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. The prevalence of willingness to accept the COVID-19 vaccine is still low compared to WHO recommended rate. Therefore, engaging communities through health education campaigns could support in addressing some of the reasons for not taking vaccine such as concerns about side effects of the vaccine, myths and misconceptions (COVID-19 vaccines are not effective, COVID-19 vaccines are infectious and one can easily get COVID-19 virus).

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Sun Y, Li B, Li N, Li B, Chen P, Hao F, Sun C. Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccine among High-Risk occupations in a Port City of China and multifaceted strategies for increasing Vaccination Coverage: a cross-sectional study. Risk Manage Healthc Policy. 2022;15:643–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chiu NC, Chi H, Tai YL, Peng CC, Tseng CY, Chen CC, Tan BF, Lin CY. Impact of wearing masks, Hand Hygiene, and Social Distancing on Influenza, Enterovirus, and all-cause Pneumonia during the Coronavirus Pandemic: Retrospective National Epidemiological Surveillance Study. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(8):e21257.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Impouma B, Mboussou F, Farham B, Makubalo L, Mwinga K, Onyango A, Sthreshley L, Akpaka K, Balde T, Atuhebwe P, et al. COVID-19 vaccination rollout in the World Health Organization African region: status at end June 2022 and way forward. Epidemiol Infect. 2022;150:e143.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Daama A, Nalugoda F, Malyabe RB, James NM, Mugamba S, Kyasanku E, Namutundu J, Kankaka EN, Nakigozi G, Kigozi G. Assessing uptake of COVID-19 preventive measures among persons aged 13–80 years during Lockdown in Wakiso, Uganda: a cross-sectional study. J Health Promotion Behav. 2021;6(2):154–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. WHO. World Health Organization. COVID 19 Factsheet. In.; 2023.

  6. Bartholomew DC, Nwaigwe CC, Orumie UC, Nwafor GO. Intervention analysis of COVID-19 vaccination in Nigeria: the naive solution Versus Interrupted Time Series. Annals Data Sci 2023:1–26.

  7. Organization WH. World Health Organization, COVID-19 statistics. In.; 2023.

  8. Alagoz O, Sethi AK, Patterson BW, Churpek M, Alhanaee G, Scaria E, Safdar N. The impact of vaccination to control COVID-19 burden in the United States: a simulation modeling approach. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(7):e0254456.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Moghadas SM, Vilches TN, Zhang K, Wells CR, Shoukat A, Singer BH, Meyers LA, Neuzil KM, Langley JM, Fitzpatrick MC et al. The impact of vaccination on COVID-19 outbreaks in the United States. medRxiv: the preprint server for health sciences 2021.

  10. Fine P, Eames K, Heymann DL. Herd immunity: a rough guide. Clin Infect Diseases: Official Publication Infect Dis Soc Am. 2011;52(7):911–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Naziru R, Zziwa S. Knowledge, Attitude, and Perception on Hepatitis B Vaccination Among Non-health Workers Attending Selected Health Facilities in Mbale City, Uganda. 2021.

  12. Naziru R, Ddamulira JB, Kabwama Ndugwa S, Namutundu J, Ssentogo J, Daama A, Ajambo A, Namatovu J, Mutaryebwa F, Ahumuza R. Self-reported Hepatitis B Vaccination Uptake and Associated factors among. Adults Attending Budwale Health Center in Mbale District Uganda; 2023.

  13. Chirico F, Teixeira da Silva JA, Tsigaris P, Sharun K. Safety & effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines: a narrative review. Indian J Med Res. 2022;155(1):91–104.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. WHO. WHO Statistics on doses of COVID-19 Vaccines.

  15. Sallam M, Al-Sanafi M, Sallam M. A global map of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rates per country: an updated concise narrative review. J Multidisciplinary Healthc. 2022;21:45.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Shakeel CS, Mujeeb AA, Mirza MS, Chaudhry B, Khan SJ. Global COVID-19 vaccine acceptance: a systematic review of associated social and behavioral factors. Vaccines. 2022;10(1):110.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Wake AD. The acceptance rate toward COVID-19 vaccine in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Global Pediatr Health. 2021;8:2333794X211048738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Berihun G, Walle Z, Teshome D, Berhanu L, Derso M. COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Associated Factors among College students in Dessie City, Northeastern Ethiopia. J Multidisciplinary Healthc. 2022;15:1735–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Tegegne MD, Melkam M, Adane T, Getawa S. COVID-19 preventive practice and associated factors in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health Pract (Oxford England). 2022;4:100329.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Naziru R, Nabukeera M, Nazziwa A, Aremu AB, Araphat U, Kyejussa Y. COVID-19 vaccination: prevalence and Associated Factors among students and staff. A Case of Islamic University in Uganda; 2022.

  21. Basta NE, Sohel N, Sulis G, Wolfson C, Maimon G, Griffith LE, Kirkland S, McMillan JM, Thompson M, Raina P. Factors Associated with willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine among 23,819 adults aged 50 years or older: an analysis of the Canadian longitudinal study on aging. Am J Epidemiol. 2022;191(6):987–98.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Tegegne MD, Girma S, Mengistu S, Mesfin T, Adugna T, Kokeb M, Melese EB, Worku YB, Wubante SM. Willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine and associated factors among adult chronic patients. A cross-sectional study in Northwest Ethiopia. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(7):e0269942.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Ackah BB, Woo M, Stallwood L, Fazal ZA, Okpani A, Ukah UV, Adu PA. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Africa: a scoping review. Global Health Res Policy. 2022;7(1):1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Fieselmann J, Annac K, Erdsiek F, Yilmaz-Aslan Y, Brzoska P. What are the reasons for refusing a COVID-19 vaccine? A qualitative analysis of social media in Germany. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kanyike AM, Olum R, Kajjimu J, Ojilong D, Akech GM, Nassozi DR, Agira D, Wamala NK, Asiimwe A, Matovu D, et al. Acceptance of the coronavirus disease-2019 vaccine among medical students in Uganda. Trop Med Health. 2021;49(1):37.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Ganem F, Folch C, Colom-Cadena A, Bordas A, Alonso L, Soriano-Arandes A, Casabona J. Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among students and parents in Sentinel Schools Network of Catalonia, Spain. PLoS ONE. 2023;18(3):e0282871.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Lee KW, Gew LT, Siau CS, Peh SC, Chia YC, Yacob S, Chan NN, Seow VK, Ooi PB. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its associated factors in Malaysia. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(9):e0266925.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. King WC, Rubinstein M, Reinhart A, Mejia R. Time trends, factors associated with, and reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: a massive online survey of US adults from January-May 2021. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(12):e0260731.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Mugamba S, Ziegel L, Bulamba RM, Kyasanku E, Johansson Århem K, Sjöland CF, Miller AP, Nakigozi G, Nalwoga GK, Watya S, et al. Cohort Profile: the Africa Medical and Behavioral Sciences Organization (AMBSO) Population Health Surveillance (APHS) in rural, semi-urban and urban Uganda. Int J Epidemiol. 2023;52(2):e116–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kiwanuka N, Laeyendecker O, Robb M, Kigozi G, Arroyo M, McCutchan F, Eller LA, Eller M, Makumbi F, Birx D, et al. Effect of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) subtype on disease progression in persons from Rakai, Uganda, with incident HIV-1 infection. J Infect Dis. 2008;197(5):707–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bongomin F, Olum R, Andia-Biraro I, Nakwagala FN, Hassan KH, Nassozi DR, Kaddumukasa M, Byakika-Kibwika P, Kiguli S, Kirenga BJ. COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among high-risk populations in Uganda. Therapeutic Adv Infect Disease. 2021;8:20499361211024376.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Kelly BJ, Southwell BG, McCormack LA, Bann CM, MacDonald PDM, Frasier AM, Bevc CA, Brewer NT, Squiers LB. Predictors of willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine in the U.S. BMC Infect Dis. 2021;21(1):338.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Belsti Y, Gela YY, Akalu Y, Dagnew B, Getnet M, Abdu Seid M, Diress M, Yeshaw Y, Fekadu SA. Willingness of Ethiopian Population to receive COVID-19 vaccine. J Multidisciplinary Healthc. 2021;14:1233–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Wake AD. The willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine and its Associated factors: Vaccination Refusal could prolong the War of this pandemic - A systematic review. Risk Manage Healthc Policy. 2021;14:2609–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Muhindo R, Okoboi S, Kiragga A, King R, Arinaitwe WJ, Castelnuovo B. COVID-19 vaccine acceptability, and uptake among people living with HIV in Uganda. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(12):e0278692.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Ndejjo R, Chen N, Kabwama SN, Namale A, Wafula ST, Wanyana I, Kizito S, Kiwanuka SN, Sambisa W, Tsai LL, et al. Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines and associated factors among adults in Uganda: a cross-sectional survey. BMJ open. 2023;13(3):e067377.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Becerra MB, Roland TC, Avina RM, Becerra BJ. Unmet Healthcare Needs among College students during the COVID-19 pandemic: implications for system-wide and structural changes for Service Delivery. Healthc (Basel Switzerland) 2022, 10(8).

  38. Govere-Hwenje S, Jarolimova J, Yan J, Khumalo A, Zondi G, Ngcobo M, Wara NJ, Zionts D, Bogart LM, Parker RA et al. Willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccination among people living with HIV in a high HIV prevalence community. Res Square 2022.

  39. Uzochukwu IC, Eleje GU, Nwankwo CH, Chukwuma GO, Uzuke CA, Uzochukwu CE, Mathias BA, Okunna CS, Asomugha LA, Esimone CO. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among staff and students in a Nigerian tertiary educational institution. Therapeutic Adv Infect Disease. 2021;8:20499361211054923.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Jabessa D, Bekele F. Willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine and associated factors among residents of Southwestern Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2022;16:1177–85.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Kawuki J, Nambooze J, Chan PS, Chen S, Liang X, Mo PKH, Wang Z. Differential COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake and Associated factors among the Slum and Estate communities in Uganda: A Cross-sectional Population-based survey. Vaccines 2023, 11(2).

  42. Amo-Adjei J, Nurzhynska A, Essuman R, Lohiniva AL. Trust and willingness towards COVID-19 vaccine uptake: a mixed-method study in Ghana, 2021. Archives Public Health = Archives belges de sante Publique. 2022;80(1):64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Oyekale AS. Factors influencing willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in Nigeria. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022, 19(11).

  44. Wake AD. The willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine and its associated factors:vaccination refusal could prolong the war of this pandemic–a systematic review. Risk Manage Healthc Policy 2021:2609–23.

  45. Kabagenyi A, Wasswa R, Nannyonga BK, Nyachwo EB, Kagirita A, Nabirye J, Atuhaire L, Waiswa P. Factors Associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Uganda: a Population-based cross-sectional survey. Int J Gen Med. 2022;15:6837–47.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Ouni PD, Namulondo R, Wanume B, Okia D, Olupot PO, Nantale R, Matovu JKB, Napyo A, Moses Lubaale YA, Nshakira N, et al. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among health workers in rural Uganda: a mixed methods study. Vaccine: X. 2023;13:100260.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Syed Alwi S, Rafidah E, Zurraini A, Juslina O, Brohi IB, Lukas S. A survey on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and concern among malaysians. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):1129.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Stern MF, Piasecki AM, Strick LB, Rajeshwar P, Tyagi E, Dolovich S, Patel PR, Fukunaga R, Furukawa NW. Willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccination among incarcerated or detained persons in Correctional and Detention facilities - Four States, September-December 2020. MMWR Morbidity Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021;70(13):473–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Phillips R, Gillespie D, Hallingberg B, Evans J, Taiyari K, Torrens-Burton A, Cannings-John R, Williams D, Sheils E, Ashfield-Watt P, et al. Perceived threat of COVID-19, attitudes towards vaccination, and vaccine hesitancy: a prospective longitudinal study in the UK. Br J Health Psychol. 2022;27(4):1354–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Wang J, Yuan B, Lu X, Liu X, Li L, Geng S, Zhang H, Lai X, Lyu Y, Feng H, et al. Willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine among the elderly and the chronic disease population in China. Hum Vaccines Immunotherapeutics. 2021;17(12):4873–88.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Humer E, Jesser A, Plener PL, Probst T, Pieh C. Education level and COVID-19 vaccination willingness in adolescents. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2023;32(3):537–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Ngo VM, Zimmermann KF, Nguyen PV, Huynh TLD, Nguyen HH. How education and GDP drive the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. Archives Public Health = Archives belges de sante Publique. 2022;80(1):171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Song S, Zang S, Gong L, Xu C, Lin L, Francis MR, Hou Z. Willingness and uptake of the COVID-19 testing and vaccination in urban China during the low-risk period: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):556.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Population health surveillance (PHS) participants for their participation in the study.

Funding

This study received funding from AMBSO-collaborating partner institutions which include: Karolinska Institutet, Sweden (FOb2019-0010) and University of California Los Angeles (SS -4468).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Africa Medical and Behavioral Sciences Organization, Nansana, Uganda

    Alex Daama, Grace Kigozi Nalwoga, Fred Nalugoda, Robert Bulamba, Emmanuel Kyasanku, Gertrude Nakigozi, Godfrey Kigozi & Stephen Mugamba

  2. Makerere University School of Public Health, Kampala, Uganda

    Alex Daama, Naziru Rashid, Kasango Asani, Robert Bulamba & Joseph Kagaayi

  3. Islamic University, Mbale, Uganda

    Naziru Rashid

  4. Mayuge Institute of Global Health Sciences Research and Innovation, Kampala, Uganda

    Naziru Rashid

Authors
  1. Alex Daama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Naziru Rashid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kasango Asani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Grace Kigozi Nalwoga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fred Nalugoda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Robert Bulamba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Emmanuel Kyasanku
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Gertrude Nakigozi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Godfrey Kigozi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Joseph Kagaayi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Stephen Mugamba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AD contributed to the conception of this research idea, study design, data analysis and including supporting all stages of this paper. RN, AK, GKN, FN, RB, EK, GN, GK, JK, and SM supported with the study design, study conceptualization, data analysis, and interpretation of findings.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alex Daama.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

The AMBSO-PHS protocol and all experimental protocols were reviewed and approved by Clark International University Research and Ethics Committee (UG-REC-015- CIURE/0059). All methods were carried out in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki ethical guidelines. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to participation in the study. Informed consent for all minors (participants below the age of 18 years) was obtained from their parents and/or their legal guardian(s) and assent was obtained from these minors. Informed consent for all illiterate participants was obtained from their legally acceptable representative (impartial witness). Only de-identified participant and household IDs are used to link all participant data, which is pseudonymzed throughout. The information is then maintained in secure locations or on computers that only authorized specific AMBSO data managers and editors have access to.

Consent to publication

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

We declare no conflict of interest.

Disclaimer

The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position of Africa Medical & Behavioral Sciences Organization (AMBSO).

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Daama, A., Rashid, N., Asani, K. et al. Willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccines, associated factors and reasons for not taking a vaccine: a cross sectional study among persons aged 13–80 years in Wakiso, Central Uganda. BMC Infect Dis 24, 391 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09285-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09285-1

Keywords

BMC Infectious Diseases

ISSN: 1471-2334

Contact us