Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34341047›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Correlates of intended COVID-19 vaccine acceptance across time and countries: results from a series of cross-sectional surveys.

John R Kerr, Claudia R Schneider, Gabriel Recchia, Sarah Dryhurst, Ullrika Sahlin, Carole Dufouil, Pierre Arwidson, Alexandra Lj Freeman, Sander van der Linden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Trust in institutions affects vaccination campaign outcomes.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

16 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

9 authors.

John R KerrWinton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK jk802@cam.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-6606-5507
Claudia R SchneiderWinton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6612-5186
Gabriel RecchiaWinton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0210-8635
Sarah DryhurstWinton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7772-8492
Ullrika SahlinCenter of Environmental and Climate Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-2932-6253
Carole DufouilBordeaux Population Health Research Center, U1219, Inserm, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2442-4476
Pierre ArwidsonDirection de la prévention - promotion de la santé, Santé publique France, Saint-Maurice, France.
Alexandra Lj FreemanWinton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4115-161X
Sander van der LindenDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0269-1744

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDescribe demographical, social and psychological correlates of willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

settingSeries of online surveys undertaken between March and October 2020.

participantsA total of 25 separate national samples (matched to country population by age and sex) in 12 different countries were recruited through online panel providers (n=25 334). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Reported willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccination.

resultsReported willingness to receive a vaccine varied widely across samples, ranging from 63% to 88%. Multivariate logistic regression analyses reveal sex (female OR=0.59, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.64), trust in medical and scientific experts (OR=1.28, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.34) and worry about the COVID-19 virus (OR=1.47, 95% CI 1.41 to 1.53) as the strongest correlates of stated vaccine acceptance considering pooled data and the most consistent correlates across countries. In a subset of UK samples, we show that these effects are robust after controlling for attitudes towards vaccination in general.

conclusionsOur results indicate that the burden of trust largely rests on the shoulders of the scientific and medical community, with implications for how future COVID-19 vaccination information should be communicated to maximise uptake.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansSARS-CoV-2VaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19preventive medicinepublic health

Identifiers

PMID34341047
PMCPMC8331327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.