Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35167591›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Relationship between lay and expert perceptions of COVID-19 vaccine development timelines in Canada and USA.

Patrick Bodilly Kane, Hannah Moyer, Amanda MacPherson, Jesse Papenburg, Brian J Ward, Stephen B Broomell, Jonathan Kimmleman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Patrick Bodilly KaneSTREAM Research Group, Division of Ethics and Policy, School of Population and Global Health, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1050-570X
Hannah MoyerSTREAM Research Group, Division of Ethics and Policy, School of Population and Global Health, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Amanda MacPhersonSTREAM Research Group, Division of Ethics and Policy, School of Population and Global Health, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jesse PapenburgDivision of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Dept. of Pediatrics, The Montreal Children's Hospital, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4232-871X
Brian J WardResearch Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Stephen B BroomellDepartment of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America.
Jonathan KimmlemanSTREAM Research Group, Division of Ethics and Policy, School of Population and Global Health, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1614-6779

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesCompare lay expectations of medical development to those of experts in the context of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine development.

methodsA short online survey of experts and lay people measuring when participants believe important vaccine milestones would occur and how likely potential setbacks were. Samples of US and Canadian lay people recruited through Qualtrics. The expert sample was created through a contact network in vaccine development and supplemented with corresponding authors of recent scholarly review articles on vaccine development.

resultsIn aggregate, lay people gave responses that were within 3 months of experts, tending to be later than experts for early milestones and earlier for later milestones. Median lay best estimates for when a vaccine would be available to the public were 08/2021 and 09/2021 for the US and Canadian samples, compared with 09-10/2021 for the experts. However, many individual lay responses showed more substantial disagreement with expert opinions, with 54% of lay best estimates of when a vaccine would be available to the public being before the median expert soonest estimate or after the median expert latest estimate. Lay people were much more pessimistic about vaccine development encountering setbacks than experts (median probability 59% of boxed warning compared with only 30% for experts). Misalignment between layperson and expert expectations was not explained by any demographic variables collected in our survey.

conclusionMedian lay expectations were generally similar to experts. At the individual level, however, lay people showed substantial variation with many believing milestones would occur much sooner than experts. Lay people were in general much more pessimistic about the prospect of setbacks than were experts.

Indexed as

Vaccine DevelopmentCanadaCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesFemaleForecastingHumansMaleSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsUnited StatesCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID35167591
PMCPMC8846503

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.