Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33809589›Full record

ArticleVaccines2021

No Such Thing as a Free-Rider? Understanding Drivers of Childhood and Adult Vaccination through a Multicountry Discrete Choice Experiment.

Frederik Verelst, Roselinde Kessels, Lander Willem, Philippe Beutels

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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.

Frederik VerelstCentre for Health Economics Research and Modelling Infectious Diseases (CHERMID), Vaccine and Infectious Disease Institute (VAXINFECTIO), University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8399-743X
Roselinde KesselsDepartment of Data Analytics and Digitalization, Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4534-0047
Lander WillemCentre for Health Economics Research and Modelling Infectious Diseases (CHERMID), Vaccine and Infectious Disease Institute (VAXINFECTIO), University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium.
Philippe BeutelsCentre for Health Economics Research and Modelling Infectious Diseases (CHERMID), Vaccine and Infectious Disease Institute (VAXINFECTIO), University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium.

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek G043815N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increased vaccine hesitancy and refusal negatively affects vaccine uptake, leading to the reemergence of vaccine preventable diseases. We aim to quantify the relative importance of factors people consider when making vaccine decisions for themselves, or for their child, with specific attention for underlying motives arising from context, such as required effort (accessibility) and opportunism (free riding on herd immunity). We documented attitudes towards vaccination and performed a discrete choice experiment in 4802 respondents in The United Kingdom, France and Belgium, eliciting preferences for six attributes: (1) vaccine effectiveness, (2) vaccine preventable disease burden, (3) vaccine accessibility in terms of copayment, vaccinator and administrative requirements, (4) frequency of mild vaccine-related side-effects, (5) vaccination coverage in the country's population and (6) local vaccination coverage in personal networks. We distinguished adults deciding on vaccination for themselves from parents deciding for their youngest child. While all attributes were found to be significant, vaccine effectiveness and accessibility stood out in all (sub)samples, followed by vaccine preventable disease burden. We confirmed that people attach more value to severity of disease compared to its frequency, and discovered that peer influence dominates free-rider motives, especially for the vaccination of children. These behavioral data are insightful for policy and are essential to parameterize dynamic vaccination behavior in simulation models. In contrast to what most game theoretical models assume, social norms dominate free-rider incentives. Policy-makers and healthcare workers should actively communicate on high vaccination coverage, and draw attention to the effectiveness of vaccines while optimizing their practical accessibility.

Indexed as

behaviordiscrete choice experimentfree-ridinginfectious diseasesocial normsvaccination

Identifiers

PMID33809589
PMCPMC7999942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.