TY - JOUR T1 - Racial differences in vaccine acceptance in a rural southern US state JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2022.05.12.22274953 SP - 2022.05.12.22274953 AU - Benjamin C. Amick III AU - Jaimi L. Allen AU - Clare C. Brown AU - Anthony Goudie AU - Mick Tilford AU - Mark Williams Y1 - 2022/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/05/17/2022.05.12.22274953.abstract N2 - Introduction To assess vaccine acceptance among adults living in a largely rural Southern state.Methods Data were collected between October 3 and October 17, 2020 using random digit dialing. Participants included residents aged 18+, able to understand English or Spanish, and provide informed consent. The primary outcome was a multi-dimensional COVID-19 vaccine acceptance measure. Scores varied between -3 to +3.Results The sample (n=1,164) was weighted to be representative of the state’s population. Black participants had the lowest overall vaccine acceptance (0.5) compared to White participants (1.2). Hispanic participants had the highest scores (1.4). In adjusted models, Black participants had 0.81 points lower acceptance than White participants, and Hispanic participants had 0.35 points higher acceptance. Hispanic participants had the highest scores for all five vaccine acceptance dimensions, relatively equivalent to White participants. Black participants had consistently lower scores, especially perceived vaccine safety (mean -0.2, SD 0.1).Conclusions The lowest vaccine acceptance rates were among Black participants particularly on perceived vaccine safety. While Black participants had the lowest acceptance scores, Hispanic participants had the highest. This variability shows the value of a multi-dimensional vaccine acceptance measure to inform COVID-19 vaccination campaign strategies.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe authors received no specific funding for this work.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Institutional Review Board of University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences gave ethical approval for this work (IRB # 260974).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll analytic de-identified files are available from REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) ER -