ArticleVaccine2022
Does a major change to a COVID-19 vaccine program alter vaccine intention? A qualitative investigation.
Article in Vaccine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond seeking information: Lessons learned from a qualitative investigation of the information practices of parents about COVID-19 vaccination in Canada.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Implementing single-dose HPV vaccination in Canada.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- West Australian parents' views on vaccinating their children against COVID-19: a qualitative study.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Utilizing the theory of planned behavior to predict COVID-19 vaccination intention: A structural equational modeling approach.Heliyon · 2023Article
- The COVID-19 pandemic in various restriction policy scenarios based on the dynamic social contact rate.Heliyon · 2023Article
- 'COVID Is Coming, and I'm Bloody Scared': How Adults with Co-Morbidities' Threat Perceptions of COVID-19 Shape Their Vaccination Decisions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- 'Corona is coming': COVID-19 vaccination perspectives and experiences amongst Culturally and Linguistically Diverse West Australians.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Western Australian health care workers' views on mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for the workplace.Health policy and technology · 2022Article
- Understandings and practices related to risk, immunity and vaccination during the Delta variant COVID-19 outbreak in Australia: An interview study.Vaccine: X · 2022Article
- A Global Survey of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Among Healthcare Workers.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOn 8th April 2021, the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) made the Pfizer-BioNtech (Comirnaty) vaccine the "preferred" vaccine for adults in Australia aged < 50 years due to a risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) following AstraZeneca vaccination. We sought to understand whether this impacted COVID-19 vaccine intentions.
methodWe undertook qualitative interviews from February - April 2021 before and after the program change with 28 adults in Perth, Western Australia. Using our COVID-19 vaccine intentions model, we assessed changes in participants' COVID-19 vaccine intention before and after the program change. Participants were classified as 1) 'acceptors': no concerns about COVID-19 vaccine safety, efficacy, access and would accept whatever vaccine is offered, 2) 'cautious acceptors': some concerns and would prefer a particular vaccine brand but would accept whatever is offered, 3) 'Wait awhile': for more data, easier access, for another vaccine brand, a greater perceived COVID-19 threat or until mandatory, or 4) 'refuser': no intention to vaccinate due to concerns about safety and/or efficacy.
resultsBefore the change, 7/18 of those aged < 50 years were 'acceptors,' 10/18 were 'cautious acceptors' and 1/18 was 'wait awhile.' Overall, 14/18 participants had the same COVID-19 vaccine intention after the change; 4/18 became more concerned. For those aged ≥ 50 years and before the change, 5/10 were 'acceptors' and 5/10 were 'cautious acceptors.' After the change, 8/10 still had the same COVID-19 vaccine intention; 2/10 became more cautious. The major concern before the program change was COVID-19 vaccines having different vaccine efficacy; the concern pivoted to safety.
conclusionThe majority of participants were 'cautious acceptors' who intended on being vaccinated; many had this intention before and after the program change. The Australian government, health care providers and media need to better address COVID-19 vaccine concerns to assist those with COVID-19 vaccine intentions receive a vaccine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.