
==== Front
Curr Health Sci J
Curr Health Sci J
CHSJ
Current Health Sciences Journal
2067-0656
2069-4032
Medical University Publishing House Craiova

2023.3.10
10.12865/CHSJ.49.04.6
Original Paper
Understanding Attitudes Toward Influenza Vaccination: Insights from a Romanian Family Medicine Patient Population
DANILESCU CLAUDIA MONICA 1
RADULESCU VIRGINIA MARIA 23
DELUREANU ANCUTA ROXANA 4
PIRLOG MIHAIL CRISTIAN 5
1 Comunity Nursing Department, Faculty of Midwives and Nursing, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, Craiova, Romania
2 Department of Medical Informatics and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, Craiova, Romania
3 Department of Automation and Electronics, University of Craiova, Craiova, Romania
4 Delmedica Private Practice, Craiova, Romania
5 Department of Medical Sociology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, Craiova, Romania
Corresponding Author: : Virginia Maria Rădulescu Department of Medical Informatics and Biostatistics University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova Craiova Romania virginia.radulescu@edu.ucv.ro
Oct-Dec 2023
29 12 2023
49 4 517523
01 5 2023
12 10 2023
Copyright © 2023, Medical University Publishing House Craiova
2023
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Public License, which permits unrestricted use, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium, non-commercially, provided the new creations are licensed under identical terms as the original work and the original work is properly cited.
Introduction: Influenza represents a global respiratory virus infection with significant individual and societal implications, leading to considerable economic burdens and substantial mortality rates. Vaccine hesitancy, characterized by delays or refusals despite vaccine availability, presents a growing challenge in achieving adequate vaccination rates globally. Aim: This study aimed to assess the attitudes of Romanian general practitioners' patients toward influenza vaccination during the recommended immunization period. Materials and Methods: A prospective multi-centered study involving 319 patients across five Family Medicine Offices in Romania was conducted. Participants completed a 12-item Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) scale, assessing factors influencing vaccine acceptance. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of demographic variables and attitudes toward vaccination. Results: The study revealed significant variations in attitudes influencing influenza vaccine acceptance. Trust in vaccine benefits and confidence in natural immunity emerged as primary motivators for vaccine acceptance/denial, whereas concerns about commercial profiteering held lesser importance. Gender and residential environment impacted specific attitudes toward vaccination, while factors such as education and employment status did not significantly influence vaccine acceptance. Discussion: The study underscores the critical role of trust in vaccine benefits as a primary driver for vaccine acceptance, diverging from prevalent conspiracy theories. While gender and residential environment influenced attitudes toward vaccination, education and employment status did not exhibit significant correlations with vaccine acceptance. Conclusions: Understanding public attitudes toward vaccination is crucial in designing effective public health strategies. This study emphasizes the importance of trust in vaccine benefits in driving vaccine acceptance, offering insights to enhance vaccination initiatives regionally.

Influenza vaccination
vaccine hesitancy
attitudes toward vaccination
trust in vaccine benefits
public health strategies
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Influenza represents one of the predominant respiratory virus infections that circulates extensively on a global scale. This malady manifests considerable repercussions on both individuals and societies, generating a substantial economic burden attributed to treatment expenses and increased hospitalizations [1, 2, 3].

According to estimations by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2017, the global annual incidence of influenza approximates one billion cases, with a subset of 3-5 million cases categorized as severe infections [4].

While the majority of influenza cases resolve within a week without medical intervention, the disease's impact on mortality is substantial, contributing to an estimated annual toll of 290,000-650,000 deaths globally [5, 6].

Ordinarily, among healthy adults, seasonal influenza tends not to instigate severe infections.

However, within the elderly demographic, an influenza infection represents a substantial health risk, exacerbated by the heightened prevalence of comorbidities within this age cohort [7].

Also, individuals grappling with underlying comorbidities, inclusive of cardiovascular diseases, chronic respiratory conditions, diabetes, obesity, neurological ailments, and concurrent bacterial infections, manifest heightened susceptibility to influenza infections, further amplifying the epidemiological burden [8, 9].

Although various measures exist to mitigate influenza incidence, vaccination stands out as the most efficacious preventive strategy [10].

However, diverging recommendations among countries delineate discrepancies regarding the primary target populations for influenza vaccination.

The WHO advocates annual vaccination for pregnant women, children aged six months to five years, older adults (>65 years), individuals with diverse comorbidities, and healthcare workers (HCWs) [11].

Conversely, the US Centre’s for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) extends its recommendation to encompass all individuals aged six months and older, emphasizing high-risk populations such as adults aged >65 years, adults with chronic health conditions, and pregnant individuals [12].

Numerous nations have since instituted policies advocating influenza vaccination for high-risk populations, especially the elderly [4, 13].

Despite these explicit guidelines, influenza vaccination rates exhibit significant variability across global regions [1].

Recorded vaccination coverage among individuals aged >6 months over the past five years demonstrated noteworthy diversity, with Saudi Arabia documenting the lowest rate at 11.0% (2021) and Brazil reporting the highest coverage of 92.0% (2018).

Examination of influenza vaccination coverage in the US reveals consistently higher rates among older adults (69.8%) and children (63.8%) compared to the national average (51.8%), thereby indicating markedly lower coverage among adults aged 18-64 years in comparison to the overall population average [14].

Therefore, comprehending impediments to vaccination and motivators influencing vaccine acceptance across various regions stands imperative in enhancing global influenza vaccination coverage.

Recognizing this declining trend, the World Health Organization (WHO) flagged vaccine hesitancy as one of the paramount global health threats in 2019.

The phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy, characterized by delays in vaccine acceptance or outright refusal despite vaccine availability [15], significantly impedes adequate vaccination uptake [16].

Reasons underlying this hesitancy encompass decreased efficacy in specific years, concerns over potential vaccine side effects, misconceptions regarding vaccine-induced disease, beliefs in alternative health practices obviating the necessity for vaccines, and the propagation of conspiracy theories through social networks alleging financial gains for physicians advocating vaccines, along with pharmaceutical companies disseminating false vaccine-related information [17, 18, 19, 20].

Vaccine hesitancy towards the influenza vaccine persists as a prevalent phenomenon on a global scale [21, 22].

Similarly, emerging data indicate a growing hesitancy concerning COVID-19 vaccines, observed both within the general populace and among healthcare professionals [23, 24].

The aim of our study was to measure the attitude of a convenience sample of Romanian general practitioners’ patients toward vaccination during the recommended period of influenza immunization process.

Materials and Methods

A prospective and multicenter study was conducted between November to December 2023 in five General Practice Offices in Craiova, Dolj County, Romania.

The study sample consisted of 319 patients who presented to their GP for periodical health assessment or other reasons related to their health status.

Before the health-status evaluation, the individuals were asked to fill a 12-item scale (Vaccination Attitudes Examination-VAX).

After that, they performed the health-check and received the recommendation for immunization against influenza through the vaccine which is currently used in the Romanian campaign of flu-vaccination.

Were also recorded the participants’ demographic (age, gender, residence, professional, educational and family status), respectively the personal history for chronic diseases.

As above-mentioned, the evaluation of attitudes and intentions towards vaccines was conducted using a 12-item Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) Scale, categorized into four distinct subgroups as delineated in previous research: (T1) mistrust of vaccine benefits, (T2) worries about unforeseen future effects, (T3) concerns about commercial profiteering, and (T4) preference for natural immunity [25].

Within these subcategories, a scoring system was employed, where a range of 5-6 out of a maximum of 6 denoted a high level of concern, 3-4 signified an intermediate level, and 1-2 indicated a low level of concern. These scores were indicative of the extent of negative attitudes individuals held towards the vaccine.

The Romanian adaptation of the VAX scale demonstrated strong reliability, along with favourable discriminative and convergent validity. The scale exhibited a robust fit, thus endorsing its suitability for identifying individuals within the Romanian population who exhibit vaccine hesitancy [26].

For the current study, it has been found that the overall Cronbach's alpha of VAX scale used is 0.9455, which indicates a high level of internal consistency. The reliability of each factor has also been assessed, and the analysis has revealed that the Cronbach's alpha score is supported and confirmed for each of the subcategories, as following: (T1) 0.966; (T2) 0.901; (T3) 0.946; (T4) 0.969. The research conducted received approval from the Ethics Committee of Craiova University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, adhering to the principles outlined in the Helsinki Declaration. Participation in the study was entirely voluntary, with individuals joining upon providing written informed consent. Stringent measures were implemented to ensure the security and confidentiality of participants' data.

All statistical analyses were performed by IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0 (Chicago, IL, USA), while the primary data were recorded in Microsoft Excel files.

Results

During the study period, were recruited 319 subjects, as a convenience sample, without being considered as representative for the general population of the Craiova city.

Analyzing the social and demographic details of the individuals involved in the research, it was observed a predominance of women (59.87%), with an average level of education (56.11%), being in a relationship (marriage, consensual union, couple) (71.79%) and professional active (53.61%) (Table 1).

Table 1 The socio-demographic characteristics of the study sample

 	 	M + SD

	
Age

	 

	56.44 (17.10)

	
 

	 

	n (%)

	
Gender

	Male

	128 (40.12)

	
 	Female

	191 (59.87)

	
Environment

	Urban

	255 (79.94)

	
 	Rural

	64 (20.06)

	
Education

	Gymnasium

	21 (6.58)

	
 	High school

	179 (56.11)

	
 	Higher education

	119 (37.30)

	
Marital status

	Single

	90 (28.21)

	
 	Couple

	229 (71.79)

	
Employment

Status

	Worker

	108 (33.86)

	
 	Healthcare professionals

	40 (12.54)

	
 	Education professionals

	23 (7.21)

	
 	Unemployed

	13 (4.07)

	
 	Retired

	135 (42.32)

	

The outcomes of the study indicate that a marked contrast exists in the ratings attributed to each factor that influences the decision to accept influenza vaccination. Specifically, the analysis of the data revealed a highly significant difference (p<.0001) in the ratings for each factor, suggesting that some factors may have a greater impact than others on the decision-making process. Thus, we observed that the positive answer to vaccine recommendation was based on their belief for the current and future vaccine benefits (T1, T2 p<0.0001), respectively the boost that vaccine bring to the natural immunity (T4, p<0.0001) and the low impact of the pharmaceutical industry over this public health issue (T3, p<0.0001).

Moreover, the results demonstrate that gender has an influence on factors T1 and T3, as indicated by the p-values below the alpha=0.05 significance level (p=0.0266 and p=0.0259, respectively). Additionally, the environment of residence of the population under analysis has an impact on T1, T2, and T3, as evidenced by the p-values that were below the alpha=0.05 confidence level (Table 2).

Table 2 Correlations of the attitude factors, vaccination decision and demographic characteristics

VAX factors

	Vaccinated

	Median

(Q1-Q3)

	p

	Gender

	Median

(Q1-Q3)

	p

	Residence

	Median

(Q1-Q3)

	p

	
T1

	Y

	17.00

(17.00-18.00)

	<0.0001

	Female

	17.00

(15.00-18.00)

	0.0266

	Rural

	16.00

(8.75-17.00)

	0.0023

	
N

	7.00

(5.00-10.00)

	Male

	17.00

(10.75-18.00)

	Urban

	17.00

(15.00-18.00)

	
T2

	Y

	4.00

(3.00-5.00)

	<0.0001

	Female

	4.00

(4.00-6.00)

	0.1303

	Rural

	6.00

(4.00-9.25)

	<0.0001

	
N

	10.00

(7.00-12.00)

	Male

	5.00

(4.00-7.00)

	Urban

	4.00

(4.00-6.00)

	
T3

	Y

	4.00

(3.00-5.00)

	<0.0001

	Female

	4.00

(3.00-6.00)

	0.0269

	Rural

	6.00

(4.00-9.00)

	<0.0001

	
N

	10.00

(7.00-15.00)

	Male

	5.00

(3.00-8.00)

	Urban

	4.00

(3.00-6.00)

	
T4

	Y

	6.00

(4.00-8.00)

	<0.0001

	Female

	7.00

(4.00-10.00)

	0.3710

	Rural

	8.00

(6.00-10.00)

	0.1426

	
N

	16.00

(10.00-18.00)

	Male

	7.00

(5.00-11.00)

	Urban

	7.00

(4.00-10.50)

	
* p Mann-Whitney test

Regarding the presence of children in the family, when they could be considered as a more protective factors when talk about decision of vaccination, the results of our study have shown that only the concerns about commercial profiteering, T3 factor, was influenced by them. A quite similar situation was recorded regarding the chronic disease diagnosis on the subjects where those with such a medical condition (207 individuals-64.89%) were not influenced in their decision by this health-complication (Table 3).

However, in our study sample, despite the declared attitude towards vaccination it was proved that half of the individuals with a diagnosis of chronic disease (163 subjects-51.10%) has accepted to be immunized against influenza within the current vaccination national campaign.

Table 3 Correlations of the attitude factors, vaccination decision and social and medical characteristics

VAX factor

	Children

	Median

(Q1-Q3)

	p

	Chronic Diseases

	Median

(Q1-Q3)

	p

	
T1

	Yes

	17.00

(11.00-18.00)

	0.1173

	Yes

	17.00

(15.00-18.00)

	0.5657

	
No

	17.00

(16.00-18.00)

	No

	17.00

(10.00-18.00)

	
T2

	Yes

	5.00

(4.00-7.00)

	0.0811

	Yes

	4.00

(4.00-6.00)

	0.2803

	
No

	4.00

(3.00-5.25)

	No

	5.00

(4.00-8.00)

	
T3

	Yes

	5.00

(3.00-7.00)

	0.0016

	Yes

	5.00

(3.00-7.00)

	0.4836

	
No

	3.00

(3.00-5.00)

	No

	4.00

(3.00-7.00)

	
T4

	Yes

	7.00

(5.00-11.00)

	0.0918

	Yes

	7.00

(4.00-10.00)

	0.2564

	
No

	6.00

(4.00-8.00)

	No

	7.00

(5.00-11.00)

	
* p Mann-Whitney test

Table 4 Relationship between attitude factors and professional status and education level

Factor

	Employment Status

	Median

(Q1-Q3)

	p

	Education

	Median

(Q1-Q3)

	p

	
T1

	Education

	17.00

(13.50-18.00)

	0.0394

	Higher Education

	17.00

(15.00-18.00)

	0.0981

	
Healthcare

	17.00

(16.00-18.00)

	College

	17.00

(10.00-18.00)

	
Retired

	17.00

(15.00-18.00)

	Secondary school

	17.50

(15.50-18.00)

	
Unemployed

	17.00

(10.00-18.00)

	Primary Education

	18.00

(17.50-18.00)

	
Worker

	16.50

(9.00-17.00)

	Higher Education

	4.00

(4.00-6.00)

	0.6317

	
T2

	Education

	4.00

(4.00-6.50)

	0.3610

	College

	5.00

(4.00-7.00)

	
Healthcare

	4.00

(4.00-5.25)

	Secondary school

	4.00

(4.00-5.00)

	
Retired

	4.00

(4.00-6.00)

	Primary Education

	4.00

(3.50-4.50)

	
Unemployed

	4.00

(3.00-6.00)

	Higher Education

	4.00

(3.00-6.00)

	0.2022

	
Worker

	5.00

(4.00-8.00)

	College

	5.00

(3.00-8.00)

	
T3

	Education

	5.00

(4.00-7.00)

	0.2567

	Secondary school

	4.50

(3.25-6.75)

	
Healhcare

	4.00

(3.00-5.00)

	Primary Education

	4.00

(3.50-4.00)

	
Retired

	4.00

(3.00-6.00)

	Higher Education

	7.00

(4.50-11.00)

	0.2554

	
Unemployed

	4.00

(3.00-5.00)

	College

	7.00

(5.00-10.00)

	
Worker

	5.00

(3.00-8.00)

	Secondary school

	8.00

(4.00-10.75)

	
T4

	Education

	7.00

(3.00-13.50)

	0.7253

	Primary Education

	4.00

(3.50-4.00)

	
Healhcare

	6.50

(4.75-9.00)

	 

	 

	 

	
Retired

	6.00

(4.00-9.00)

	 

	 

	 

	
Unemployed

	7.00

(5.00-9.00)

	 

	 

	 

	
Worker

	7.00

(5.00-11.25)

	 

	 

	 

	
* p Kruskal-Wallis test

Upon analyzing the p-values for each factor in Table 4, it has been determined that neither education nor employment status holds significant influence over the acceptance or non-acceptance of influenza vaccination.

The results have been carefully examined (Kruskal-Wallis test), and it can be concluded that there is no statistically significant correlation between these two factors and the decision to accept or reject vaccination against influenza (Table 4).

Discussions

Vaccines play a pivotal role in preventing and managing influenza, endorsed by various worldwide and local public health entities. Nevertheless, discrepancies arise among different nations regarding the prioritization of specific demographics for influenza vaccination, leading to conflicting recommendations on target populations for vaccination.

In our country, the ongoing influenza vaccination drive prioritizes particularly vulnerable groups, including children, pregnant women, individuals with chronic cardiovascular, respiratory, kidney, liver, and neurological conditions, those with metabolic, oncological, or autoimmune disorders, people with congenital malformations, individuals living with HIV/AIDS, the elderly, and healthcare workers [27].

Despite concerted efforts by healthcare authorities, the vaccination coverage remains below anticipated levels. Consequently, understanding the underlying reasons for vaccine refusal becomes increasingly crucial within this context.

Our study contributes to the collective effort aimed at examining the population's perspective on influenza immunization.

Specifically, our research focused on identifying the primary factors influencing individuals' decisions regarding vaccination.

According to our working instrument, there are those four main reasons that stands behind the decision of accepting vaccination, respectively mistrust of vaccine benefits, worries about unforeseen future effects, concerns about commercial profiteering, and preference for natural immunity.

Our study sample revealed that trust in the vaccine was the primary motivator for those who accepted vaccination, while a belief in their own immunity was the primary reason for refusal.

Unlike certain international studies [28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34], our investigation did not find cost as a significant barrier to vaccination due to the complete reimbursement of expenses during the ongoing campaign.

The influence of gender on the inclination toward vaccination exhibited notable significance in only two domains within our study cohort.

Specifically, women demonstrated a higher propensity to place trust in the perceived benefits of the vaccine, whereas men exhibited increased apprehension regarding potential commercial exploitation associated with the vaccine.

Consequently, 79.06% of women opted for vaccination, contrasting with 69.53% of men who concurred.

This finding diverges from certain prior studies that underscored an inverse pattern in gender disparity, where a slightly elevated inclination towards vaccination was observed among men (45.6%-56.5%) in comparison to females (43.6%-47.6%) [35, 36, 37].

The domains explored within the VAX scale exhibited a direct correlation with the populace's educational background and knowledge base. Within our study cohort, a predominant percentage of individuals possessed an average level of education, with 62.69% having completed gymnasium or high school, while only one-third (37.31%) pursued higher education. Interestingly, this distribution did not significantly impact the outcomes on the VAX scale across any of the four domains.

In contrast to our findings, extensive literature highlights the influential role of education and comprehension in shaping individuals' decisions regarding vaccine acceptance.

Other studies have shown a positive association between higher levels of education and a predisposition toward vaccination acceptance [38, 39].

Additionally, an increased emphasis on informed knowledge within the biomedical and vaccine domains markedly amplifies individuals' willingness to undergo vaccination [40].

Conclusions

Within the landscape of escalating infectious occurrences, vaccination assumes a paramount role within prevention strategies.

A comprehensive understanding of public sentiment regarding artificial immunization stands as a pivotal determinant in shaping the architecture of vaccination initiatives.

Our investigation has elucidated that the primary driver influencing the inclination towards vaccine acceptance resides in trust regarding the perceived benefits of vaccination, whereas conspiracy theories occupy a lower priority in this regard.

These findings hold significant promise in informing the development of nuanced and effective public health strategies at a regional level.

Conflict of interests

None to declare.
==== Refs
References

1 Moore KA Ostrowsky JT Kraigsley AM Mehr AJ Bresee JS Friede MH Gellin BG Golding JP Hart PJ Moen A Weller CL Osterholm MT A Research and Development (R&D) roadmap for influenza vaccines: Looking toward the future Vaccine 2021 39 45 6573 6584 34602302
2 Kwong EW Pang SM Choi PP Wong TK Influenza vaccine preference and uptake among older people in nine countries J Adv Nurs 2010 66 10 2297 308 20722815
3 World Health Assembly, Prevention and control of influenza pandemics and annual epidemics. Fifty-sixth world health assembly: resolution WHA Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/ handle/10665/78320/ea56r19.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y 2003
4 WHO World Health Organization, Global Influenza Strategy 2019-2030 Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/311184/9789241515320-eng.pdf?sequence=18&isAllowed=ycoll 2003
5 Krammer F Smith GJD Fouchier RAM Peiris M Kedzierska K Doherty PC Palese P Shaw ML Treanor J Webster RG García-Sastre A Influenza Nat Rev Dis Primers 2018 4 1 3 3 29955068
6 Iuliano AD Roguski KM Chang HH et al Estimates of global seasonal influenza-associated respiratory mortality: a modelling study Lancet 2018 391 10127 1285 1300 29248255
7 Smetana J Chlibek R Shaw J Splino M Prymula R Influenza vaccination in the elderly Hum Vaccin Immunother 2018 14 3 540 9 28708957
8 Macias AE McElhaney JE Chaves SS et al The disease burden of influenza beyond respiratory illness Vaccine 2021 39 Suppl 1 6 14 33277059
9 Honce R Schultz-Cherry S Impact of Obesity on Influenza A Virus Pathogenesis, Immune Response, and Evolution Front Immunol 2019 10 1071 1071 31134099
10 Gazibara T Kovacevic N Kisic-Tepavcevic D Nurkovic S Kurtagic I Gazibara T Pekmezovic T Flu vaccination among older persons: study of knowledge and practices J Health Popul Nutr 2019 38 1 2 2 30606257
11 World Health Organization, Influenza Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/influenza-(seasonal)
12 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Who Should and Who Should NOT Get a Flu Vaccine Available from: ext-link-type="url" xlink:href="https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/whoshouldvax.htm"
13 The Macroepidemiology The macroepidemiology of influenza vaccination in 56 countries, 1997-2003 Vaccine 2005 23 44 5133 5143 16039762
14 World Health organization, Influenza Vaccination Coverage Available from: https://immunizationdata.who.int/pages/coveage/flu.html?CODE=USA+GBR+FRA+ESP+DEU+ITA+CHN+BRA+CAN+MEX+JPN+SAU+ZAF+AUS&ANTIGEN=FLU_ALL&YEAR=
15 European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Vaccine hesitancy Available from: https:// www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/immunisation-vaccines/vaccine-hesitancy
16 Dubé È Farrands A Lemaitre T Boulianne N Sauvageau C Boucher FD Tapiero B Quach C Ouakki M Gosselin V Gagnon D De Wals Petit G Jacques MC Gagneur A Overview of knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, vaccine hesitancy and vaccine acceptance among mothers of infants in Quebec, Canada Hum Vaccin Immunother 2019 15 1 113 120 30095325
17 Bianco A Mascaro V Zucco R Pavia M Parent perspectives on childhood vaccination: how to deal with vaccine hesitancy and refusal Vaccine 2019 37 984 990 30655175
18 Napolitano F D’Alessandro A Angelillo IF Investigating Italian parents’ vaccine hesitancy: a cross-sectional survey Hum Vaccin Immunother 2018 14 7 1558 1565 29641945
19 Sondagar C Xu R MacDonald NE Dube´ E Vaccine acceptance: How to build and maintain trust in immunization Can Commun Dis Rep 2020 46 5 155 159 32558811
20 Stein-Zamir C Israeli A Timeliness and completeness of routine childhood vaccinations in young children residing in a district with recurrent vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks, Jerusalem, Israel Euro Surveill 2019 24 6 1800004 1800004 30755293
21 Roller-Wirnsberger R Lindner S Kolosovski L Platzer E Dovjak P Flick H Tziraki C Illario M The role of health determinants in the influenza vaccination uptake among older adults (65+): a scope review Aging Clin Exp Res 2021 15 1 10
22 González-Block MÁ Gutiérrez-Calderón E Pelcastre-Villafuerte BE Arroyo-Laguna J Comes Y Crocco P Fachel-Leal A Noboa L Riva-Knauth D Rodríguez-Zea B Ruoti M Sarti E Puentes-Rosas E Influenza vaccination hesitancy in five countries of South America. Confidence, complacency and convenience as determinants of immunization rates PLoS One 2020 15 12 0243833 0243833
23 Verger P Dualé C Lenzi N Scronias D Pulcini C Launay O Vaccine hesitancy among hospital staff physicians: A cross-sectional survey in France in 2019 Vaccine 2020 39 32 4481 4488
24 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 Manag Healthc Policy 2021 14 2609 2623 34188572
25 Martin LR Petrie KJ Understanding the Dimensions of Anti-Vaccination Attitudes: The Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) Scale Ann Behav Med 2017 51 652 660 28255934
26 Huza G The Psychometric Properties of a Romanian Version of the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) Scale International Journal of HIV/AIDS Prevention, Education and Behavioural Science 2020 6 1 25 31
27 ORDIN nr. 3.120 din 12 septembrie 2023 pentru aprobarea segmentelor populaționale care beneficiază de prescrierea, eliberarea și decontarea în regim de compensare a medicamentelor imunologice folosite pentru producerea imunității active sau folosite pentru prevenirea unor boli transmisibile. Available from: https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/274488 2023
28 De Perio Wiegand DM Brueck SE Influenza vaccination coverage among school employees: Assessing knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors J Sch Health 2014 84 586 592 25117893
29 Kosaka M Kotera Y Tsuda K Takahashi K Hamaki T Kusumi E Kami M Tanimoto T Influenza vaccination uptake and attitudes among adult cancer patients in Japan: A web-based questionnaire survey before the 2020/2021 season. Hum Vaccines Immunother 2021 17 5509 5513
30 Yan S Wang Y Zhu W Zhang L Gu H Liu D Zhu A Xu H Hao L Ye C Barriers to influenza vaccination among different populations in Shanghai Hum Vaccines Immunother 2021 17 1403 1411
31 Bertoldo G Pesce A Pepe A Pelullo CP Di Giuseppe Collaborative Working Seasonal influenza: Knowledge, attitude and vaccine uptake among adults with chronic conditions in Italy PLoS One 2019 14 5 0215978 0215978
32 Mercadante AR Law AV Will they, or won’t they? Examining patients’ vaccine intention for flu and COVID-19 using the Health Belief Model Res Soc Adm Pharm 2021 17 1596 1605
33 Luz PM Johnson RE Brown HE Workplace availability, risk group and perceived barriers predictive of 2016-17 influenza vaccine uptake in the United States: A cross-sectional study Vaccine 2017 35 43 5890 5896 28890192
34 Roy M Sherrard L Dubé È Gilbert NL Determinants of non-vaccination against seasonal influenza Health Rep 2018 29 10 12 22
35 Gidengil CA Parker AM Zikmund-Fisher BJ Trends in risk perceptions and vaccination intentions: a longitudinal study of the first year of the H1N1 pandemic Am J Public Health 2012 102 4 672 679 22397349
36 Wu S Su J Yang P Zhang H Li H Chu Y Hua W Li C Tang Y Wang Q Willingness to accept a future influenza A(H7N9) vaccine in Beijing, China Vaccine 2018 36 4 491 497 29246476
37 Liu M Cui T Wang Q Han Y Han Y Yang L Shi N Yi Y Jin H Using an extended protection motivation theory to explain vaccine hesitancy: a cross-sectional study among Chinese adults Hum Vaccin Immunother 2022 18 1 2026136 2026136 35103578
38 Miller JD Ackerman MS Laspra B Polino C Huffaker JS Public attitude toward Covid-19 vaccination: The influence of education, partisanship, biological literacy, and coronavirus understanding FASEB J 2022 36 7 e22382 e22382 35657606
39 Rincón Uribe Godinho RC Machado MAS Oliveiraq KR Neira Espejo Health knowledge, health behaviors and attitudes during pandemic emergencies: a systematic review PLoS One 2021 16 9 0256731 0256731
40 Samanta S Banerjee J Kar SS Ali KM Giri B Pal A Dash SK Awareness, knowledge and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine among the people of West Bengal, India: A web-based survey Vacunas 2022 23 46 55
