Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33556325›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Public health2021

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a representative working-age population in France: a survey experiment based on vaccine characteristics.

Michaël Schwarzinger, Verity Watson, Pierre Arwidson, François Alla, Stéphane Luchini

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04912284 (Africa COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy), which is not on this map. Cited by 444 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
444citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
92.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT04912284 completednot on this map

Africa COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: a Multi-country Cross-sectional Study

TypeobservationalSponsorBernhard Nocht Institute for Tropical MedicineRan2021 to 2021Enrolled4,977ConditionsCovid19
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

444 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 824 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Time preferences and COVID-19 vaccination uptake.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Michaël SchwarzingerDepartment of Methodology and Innovation in Prevention, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, France; University of Bordeaux, Inserm UMR 1219-Bordeaux Population Health, Bordeaux, France. Electronic address: michael.schwarzinger@chu-bordeaux.fr.
Verity WatsonHealth Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Pierre ArwidsonSanté Publique France, Saint Maurice, France.
François AllaDepartment of Methodology and Innovation in Prevention, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, France; University of Bordeaux, Inserm UMR 1219-Bordeaux Population Health, Bordeaux, France.
Stéphane LuchiniAix-Marseille University, Centre National de la recherche Scientifique, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, Marseille, France.
Bordeaux Population Health · FRAix-Marseille Université · FRSanté Publique France · FRUniversity of Aberdeen · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HERU1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOpinion polls on vaccination intentions suggest that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is increasing worldwide; however, the usefulness of opinion polls to prepare mass vaccination campaigns for specific new vaccines and to estimate acceptance in a country's population is limited. We therefore aimed to assess the effects of vaccine characteristics, information on herd immunity, and general practitioner (GP) recommendation on vaccine hesitancy in a representative working-age population in France.

methodsIn this survey experiment, adults aged 18-64 years residing in France, with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, were randomly selected from an online survey research panel in July, 2020, stratified by gender, age, education, household size, and region and area of residence to be representative of the French population. Participants completed an online questionnaire on their background and vaccination behaviour-related variables (including past vaccine compliance, risk factors for severe COVID-19, and COVID-19 perceptions and experience), and were then randomly assigned according to a full factorial design to one of three groups to receive differing information on herd immunity (>50% of adults aged 18-64 years must be immunised [either by vaccination or infection]; >50% of adults must be immunised [either by vaccination or infection]; or no information on herd immunity) and to one of two groups regarding GP recommendation of vaccination (GP recommends vaccination or expresses no opinion). Participants then completed a series of eight discrete choice tasks designed to assess vaccine acceptance or refusal based on hypothetical vaccine characteristics (efficacy [50%, 80%, 90%, or 100%], risk of serious side-effects [1 in 10 000 or 1 in 100 000], location of manufacture [EU, USA, or China], and place of administration [GP practice, local pharmacy, or mass vaccination centre]). Responses were analysed with a two-part model to disentangle outright vaccine refusal (irrespective of vaccine characteristics, defined as opting for no vaccination in all eight tasks) from vaccine hesitancy (acceptance depending on vaccine characteristics).

findingsSurvey responses were collected from 1942 working-age adults, of whom 560 (28·8%) opted for no vaccination in all eight tasks (outright vaccine refusal) and 1382 (71·2%) did not. In our model, outright vaccine refusal and vaccine hesitancy were both significantly associated with female gender, age (with an inverted U-shaped relationship), lower educational level, poor compliance with recommended vaccinations in the past, and no report of specified chronic conditions (ie, no hypertension [for vaccine hesitancy] or no chronic conditions other than hypertension [for outright vaccine refusal]). Outright vaccine refusal was also associated with a lower perceived severity of COVID-19, whereas vaccine hesitancy was lower when herd immunity benefits were communicated and in working versus non-working individuals, and those with experience of COVID-19 (had symptoms or knew someone with COVID-19). For a mass vaccination campaign involving mass vaccination centres and communication of herd immunity benefits, our model predicted outright vaccine refusal in 29·4% (95% CI 28·6-30·2) of the French working-age population. Predicted hesitancy was highest for vaccines manufactured in China with 50% efficacy and a 1 in 10 000 risk of serious side-effects (vaccine acceptance 27·4% [26·8-28·0]), and lowest for a vaccine manufactured in the EU with 90% efficacy and a 1 in 100 000 risk of serious side-effects (vaccine acceptance 61·3% [60·5-62·1]).

interpretationCOVID-19 vaccine acceptance depends on the characteristics of new vaccines and the national vaccination strategy, among various other factors, in the working-age population in France.

fundingFrench Public Health Agency (Santé Publique France).

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFranceHumansMaleMiddle AgedVaccinationYoung AdultCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID33556325
PMCPMC7864787
OpenAlexW3128864568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.