Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34835181›Full record

ArticleVaccines2021

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in a City with Free Choice and Sufficient Doses.

Martin C S Wong, Eliza L Y Wong, Annie W L Cheung, Junjie Huang, Christopher K C Lai, Eng Kiong Yeoh, Paul K S Chan

Open access · goldAbstract 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 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Predictors of COVID-19 Stress and COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance among Adolescents in Ghana.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Martin C S WongJC School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0001-7706-9370
Eliza L Y WongCentre for Health Systems & Policy Research, JC School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0001-9983-6219
Annie W L CheungCentre for Health Systems & Policy Research, JC School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0001-6968-6221
Junjie HuangJC School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0003-2382-4443
Christopher K C LaiDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0001-8591-5944
Eng Kiong YeohCentre for Health Systems & Policy Research, JC School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Paul K S ChanDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0002-6360-4608
Chinese University of Hong Kong · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVaccine hesitancy represents one of the major global health issues around the world. We examined the perception, attitude, perceived barriers and facilitation measures of receiving the COVID-19 vaccine in a Chinese population with free vaccine choices (Sinovac [Coronavac] vs. BioNTech/Fosun [Comirnaty]) and adequate doses.

methodWe conducted a random telephone survey of the general population in 1195 subjects aged 18 years or above from 23 April 2021 to 8 May 2021 after two months of vaccine rollout. A descriptive analysis of the levels of enabling factors, obstacles and perception of COVID-19 vaccination was conducted using ANOVA and Chi-square tests for trend.

resultsOnly 10.1% and 13.5% had received one and two COVID-19 vaccine doses, respectively. Among those who had not received any COVID-19 vaccine (75.4%), only 25.1% expressed their intention to receive in the coming 6 months. The barriers with the highest scores included "having heard of cases with serious adverse events or death after vaccination" (score: 8.17 out 10, 95% C.I. 7.99, 8.35), "lack of confidence on governmental recommendations" (7.69, 95% C.I. 7.47, 7.91), and "waiting for a better vaccine" (7.29, 95% C.I. 7.07, 7.52). The highest score for the impact of various incentives for vaccination was for "vaccine passports for overseas travel" (4.44, 95% C.I. 4.18, 4.71).

conclusionsVaccine hesitancy is commonly observed in this Chinese population despite adequate provision of vaccine doses and choices. No single incentive is strong enough to promote vaccination, and multiple facilitation measures for different groups of population are needed to encourage vaccine uptake. Active clarification and promotion by medical professionals together with a variety of incentives are needed to drive vaccine uptake.

Indexed as

barrierscompulsory vaccinationCOVID-19incentivesvaccine choicevaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID34835181
PMCPMC8618889
OpenAlexW3211095058

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.