ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2022
Testing the validity of the modified vaccine attitude question battery across 22 languages with a large-scale international survey dataset: within the context of COVID-19 vaccination.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Method to Explore the Best Mixed-Effects Model in a Data-Driven Manner with Multiprocessing: Applications in Public Health Research.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2024Article
- Cross-language validation of COVID-19 Compliance Scale in 28 languages.Epidemiology and infection · 2023Article
- The effects of secondary stressors, social identity, and social support on perceived stress and resilience: Findings from the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of environmental psychology · 2023Article
- Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine based on the health belief model: a multicenter national survey among medical care workers in China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- Validity testing of the conspiratorial thinking and anti-expert sentiment scales during the COVID-19 pandemic across 24 languages from a large-scale global dataset.Epidemiology and infection · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we tested the validity of the modified version of the Vaccine Attitude Question Battery (VAQB) across 22 different languages. Validity test was conducted with a large-scale international survey dataset, COVIDiSTRESSII Global Survey, collected from 20,601 participants from 62 countries. We employed exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, measurement invariance test, and measurement alignment for internal validity test. Moreover, we examined correlation between the VAQB score, vaccination intent, compliance with preventive measures, and trust in public health-related agents. The results reported that the modified VAQB, which included five items, showed good validity across 22 languages with measurement alignment. Furthermore, the VAQB score showed negative association with vaccination intent, compliance, and trust as expected. The findings from this study provide additional evidence supporting the validity of the modified VAQB in 22 languages for future large-scale international research on COVID-19 and vaccination.
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.