Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34560471›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2021

Vaccine uptake and constrained decision making: The case of Covid-19.

Leonardo Becchetti, Paolo Candio, Francesco Salustri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors.

Leonardo BecchettiDepartment of Economics and Finance, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Italy. Electronic address: becchetti@economia.uniroma2.it.
Paolo CandioCentre for Economics of Obesity, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom. Electronic address: p.candio@bham.ac.uk.
Francesco SalustriInstitute for Global Health, University College London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: f.salustri@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Policy makers require support in conceptualizing and assessing the impact that vaccination policies can have on the proportion of the population being vaccinated against COVID-19. To this purpose, we propose a behavioural economics-based framework to model vaccination choices. We calibrate our model using up-to-date surveys on people attitudes toward vaccination as well as estimates of COVID-19 infection and mortality rates and vaccine efficacy for the UK population. Our findings show that vaccine campaigns hardly reach herd immunity if the sceptics have real-time information on the proportion of the population being vaccinated and the negationists do not change their attitudes toward vaccination. Based on our results, we discuss the main implications of the model's application in the context of nudging and voluntariness versus mandatory rule-based policies.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesCOVID-19 VaccinesDecision MakingHumansSARS-CoV-2VaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesCOVID-19Decision makingHealth beliefsNudgingPublic healthUnited KingdomVaccine campaign

Identifiers

PMID34560471
PMCPMC8445765

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.