ArticleVaccine2022
Couples and COVID-19 vaccination: Frequency and reasons for discordance.
Article in Vaccine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspectives on COVID-19 vaccine decision-making in women of reproductive age: A social approach.Patient education and counseling · 2026Article
- Social networks and vaccination: a perspective on the essential role of social networks to improve vaccination outcomes in public health.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Vaccine Beliefs Among Uninsured People Receiving Care at Free Clinics.Journal of community health · 2025Article
- Vaccination homophily in ego contact networks during the COVID-19 pandemic.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Uptake and impact of COVID-19 vaccination among HIV key populations: a cohort study from Tamil Nadu, India.Journal of rural medicine : JRM · 2023Article
- Human papillomavirus vaccine coverage in male-male partnerships attending a sexual health clinic in Melbourne, Australia.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 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
The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of concordance and discordance in the COVID-19 vaccination status of intimate couples. Partners are well known to influence each other's health behaviors, but previous reports of couples' COVID-19 vaccination status were not found. Among 1305 respondents to an on-line survey who were living with their partners, couples' COVID-19 vaccination status was 15.63% discordant and 84.37% concordant. Different potentially modifiable reasons for being unvaccinated were emphasized by unvaccinated participants with vaccinated partners and by vaccinated participants with unvaccinated partners. This study provides an estimate of the proportion of couples with discordant COVID-19 vaccine status. The development of tailored, scalable interventions potentially involving the partner might increase the COVID-19 vaccine concordance rate.
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.