Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33358265›Full record

ArticleVaccine2021

Preferences for a COVID-19 vaccine in Australia.

Antonio Borriello, Daniel Master, Andrea Pellegrini, John M Rose

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

80 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Which factors drive the choice of the French-speaking Quebec population towards a COVID-19 vaccination programme: A discrete-choice experiment.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Antonio BorrielloCentre for Business Intelligence and Data Analytics, Business School, University of Technology Sydney, 14/28 Ultimo Rd, Ultimo, NSW 2007, Australia. Electronic address: antonio.borriello@uts.edu.au.
Daniel MasterCentre for Business Intelligence and Data Analytics, Business School, University of Technology Sydney, 14/28 Ultimo Rd, Ultimo, NSW 2007, Australia.
Andrea PellegriniCentre for Business Intelligence and Data Analytics, Business School, University of Technology Sydney, 14/28 Ultimo Rd, Ultimo, NSW 2007, Australia.
John M RoseCentre for Business Intelligence and Data Analytics, Business School, University of Technology Sydney, 14/28 Ultimo Rd, Ultimo, NSW 2007, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In absence of a COVID-19 vaccine, testing, contact tracing and social restrictions are among the most powerful strategies adopted around the world to slow down the spread of the pandemic. Citizens of most countries are suffering major physical, psychological and economic distress. At this stage, a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine is the most sustainable option to manage the current pandemic. However, vaccine hesitancy by even a small subset of the population can undermine the success of this strategy. The objective of this research is to investigate the vaccine characteristics that matter the most to Australian citizens and to explore the potential uptake of a COVID-19 vaccine in Australia. Through a stated preference experiment, preferences towards a COVID-19 vaccine of 2136 residents of the Australian states and territories were collected and analysed via a latent class model. Results show that preferences for mild adverse cases, mode of administration, location of administration, price and effectiveness are heterogeneous. Conversely, preferences for immediacy and severe reactions are homogeneous, with respondents preferring a shorter period until vaccine is available and lower instances of severe side effects. The expected uptake of the vaccine is estimated under three different scenarios, with the value of 86% obtained for an average scenario. By calculating individual preferences, the willingness to pay is estimated for immediacy, effectiveness, mild and severe side effects.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAustraliaCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient PreferenceSurveys and QuestionnairesVaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesAcceptanceCOVID-19UptakeVaccineWillingness to pay

Identifiers

PMID33358265
PMCPMC7832016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.