Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34217571›Full record

ArticleVaccine2021

Adapting the Motors of Influenza Vaccination Acceptance Scale into the Motors of COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance Scale: Psychometric evaluation among mainland Chinese university students.

I-Hua Chen, Daniel Kwasi Ahorsu, Nai-Ying Ko, Cheng-Fang Yen, Chung-Ying Lin, Mark D Griffiths, Amir H Pakpour

Abstract read
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 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

I-Hua ChenChinese Academy of Education Big Data, Qufu Normal University, Qufu, China.
Daniel Kwasi AhorsuDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health & Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong.
Nai-Ying KoDepartment of Nursing, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Cheng-Fang YenDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung 80708, Taiwan; Department of Psychiatry, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung 80708, Taiwan. Electronic address: p03132006@gmail.com.
Chung-Ying LinInstitute of Allied Health Sciences, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan; Department of Occupational Therapy, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan; Department of Public Health, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan. Electronic address: cylin36933@gmail.com.
Mark D GriffithsInternational Gaming Research Unit, Psychology Department, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK.
Amir H PakpourDepartment of Nursing, School of Health and Welfare, Jönköping University, Jönköping, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19 continues to ravage the world with economies and life significantly and negatively affected. Fortunately, there has been significant progress in the production of vaccines to stem the infection. However, with controversies and myths surrounding vaccinations, it is timely to examine individuals' willingness to vaccinate. The present study adapted the Motors of Influenza Vaccination Acceptance Scale (MoVac-Flu Scale) into the Motors of COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance Scale (MoVac-COVID19S) for validation and assessed the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination utilizing the cognitive model of empowerment (CME).

methodsA total of 3145 university students (mean age = 20.80 years; SD = 2.09) were recruited for the present study between January 5 and 16, 2021. Two MoVac-COVID19S scales (9-item and 12-item) were adapted from the MoVac-Flu Scale, an instrument developed using CME. Psychometric tests were conducted to ascertain reliability and validity properties.

resultsThe findings indicated that the MoVac-COVID19S had high internal consistency in both the 9-item version (ω = 0.921) and 12-item version (ω = 0.898). The factor structure of the MoVac-COVID19S (9-item and 12-item versions) corresponded well with CME theory. All the fit indices were satisfactory (comparative fit index = 0.984, Tucker-Lewis index = 0.971, root mean square error of approximation = 0.088, standardized root mean square residual = 0.058) but the 9-item MoVac-COVID had better fit indices than the 12-item MoVac-COVID due to the negative wording effects existing in the 12-item MoVac-COVID19S. The scale had satisfactory known-group validity in both 9-item and 12-item versions.

conclusionsThe MoVac-COVID19S has promising psychometric properties based on internal consistency, factor structure, and known-group validity.

Indexed as

COVID-19Influenza, HumanAdultChinaCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSARS-CoV-2StudentsSurveys and QuestionnairesUniversitiesVaccinationYoung AdultCOVID-19 VaccinesConfirmatory factor analysisCOVID-19PsychometricsVaccineYoung adults

Identifiers

PMID34217571
PMCPMC8216877

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.