Table 7.

Among people who agree/strongly agree with hypothetical scenarios, the frequency and proportion of participants’ concerns related to vaccine prioritization and screening: stratified by experience with a serious vaccine reaction, vaccine hesitancy, and trust in public health authorities

	Weighted %
				Vaccine Hesitancy
	Serious Vaccine Reactionb			Parents of Young Children			Parents of Teenagers			Adults without Minor Children			Trust in PHA
	No	Yes	P-value	Low	High	P-value	Low	High	P-value	Low	High	P-value	Low	High	P-value
If there was a short supply of vaccine, it would make sense for the people “more susceptible” to infection to get it first.a	78.8	59.4	<.01	71.9	65.2	.07	77.5	65.5	.01	82.4	75.3	.03	63.3	84.4	<.01
If there was a short supply of vaccine, it would make sense for the “more contagious” people to get it first.a	80.7	60.6	<.01	71.1	74.5	.34	80.9	69.0	<.01	78.8	76.3	.46	64.5	85.4	<.01
It would bother me if my doctor identified me as “more contagious” or “more susceptible.”a	38.1	50.7	<.01	45.1	44.7	.93	39.8	50.3	.04	34.4	39.6	.18	47.3	35.9	<.01
Getting vaccinated should be an individual’s choice, even if they are “more contagious” or “more susceptible.”a	60.4	73.9	<.01	69.5	61.7	.04	63.2	64.1	.84	60.8	56.7	.30	67.2	59.7	<.01
	Serious Vaccine Reactionb,f			Parents of Young Childrenc			Parents of Teenagersd			Adults without Minor Childrene			Trust in PHAf
	No	Yes	P-value	Low	High	P-value	Low	High	P-value	Low	High	P-value	Low	High	P-value
Identifying people as “more contagious” or “more susceptible will hurt people.a	36.2	45.1	<.01	41.8	42.3	.91	35.7	46.8	.03	31.2	44.4	<.01	49.1	30.1	<.01
If your genes or DNA showed you to be “more contagious” or likely to get other people sick, how likely would you be to get vaccinated to PROTECT OTHER PEOPLE?a	57.4	50.2	.05	53.4	55.9	.54	58.8	52.5	.22	62.5	46.9	<.01	51.6	59.5	<.01
Screening tests that warn who is at increased risk of paralysis and death from vaccines will be worthwhile if they help predict who will have an adverse reaction.a	67.8	57.0	<.01	64.8	62.1	.50	67.4	58.7	.07	67.8	62.7	.19	58.2	70.8	<.01
The U.S. government should invest in making vaccines more effective instead of trying to reduce the risk of very serious and rare events, like paralysis and death after getting a vaccine.a	68.9	80.7	<.01	80.3	69.9	.01	72.5	69.1	.53	67.2	65.5	.69	74.4	68.7	.02
	Serious Vaccine Reactionb,f			Parents of Young Childrenc			Parents of Teenagersd			Adults without Minor Childrene			Trust in PHAf
	No	Yes	P-value	Low	High	P-value	Low	High	P-value	Low	High	P-value	Low	High	P-value
My confidence in vaccines would increase if the U.S. government spent more money studying how safe vaccines are now and telling the public the results.a	70.0	57.6	<.01	66.7	60.1	.09	69.9	57.0	<.01	75.3	60.6	<.01	57.4	75.3	<.01
If you were told you were NOT going to be among the first groups vaccinated during an infectious disease outbreak because your genetics showed you were not “more contagious” or “more susceptible” to infection, how might you react? Please check all that apply.a
I would be angry because I would want the vaccine.	20.7	34.4	<.01	26.6	31.0	.23	26.5	21.4	.25	19.7	11.9	.01	27.9	18.9	<.01

^aThese items had a positively and negatively worded version. The scale of the negatively worded items was reversed and combined with its positively phrased counterpart for analysis.

^bSerious Reactions: unweighted n = 71 “don’t know” responses combined with n = 1,465 “no” for analysis

^cParents of Young Children: unweighted n = 724; weighted n = 706

^dParents of Teenagers: unweighted n = 515, weighted n = 507.

^eAdults without minor children: weighted n = 686, unweighted n = 706, includes unweighted n = 2 “prefer not to answer” parent status” and unweighted n = 12 “prefer not answer” child’s age; Taylor-linearized variance estimation for weighted survey data used; p-values estimated using two-sided general tests of association.

^fUnweighted N = 1,925; Weighted N = 1,927.87.