Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35476432›Full record

ArticleScience advances2022

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in eight European countries: Prevalence, determinants, and heterogeneity.

Janina I Steinert, Henrike Sternberg, Hannah Prince, Barbara Fasolo, Matteo M Galizzi, Tim Büthe, Giuseppe A Veltri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Janina I SteinertHochschule für Politik, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7120-0075
Henrike SternbergTUM School of Social Sciences and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Hannah PrinceHochschule für Politik, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Barbara FasoloDepartment of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4643-5689
Matteo M GalizziDepartment of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.
Tim BütheHochschule für Politik, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4724-5000
Giuseppe A VeltriDepartment of Sociology and Social Research, University of Trento, Trento, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9472-2236

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We examine heterogeneity in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy across eight European countries. We reveal striking differences across countries, ranging from 6.4% of adults in Spain to 61.8% in Bulgaria reporting being hesitant. We experimentally assess the effectiveness of different messages designed to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Receiving messages emphasizing either the medical benefits or the hedonistic benefits of vaccination significantly increases COVID-19 vaccination willingness in Germany, whereas highlighting privileges contingent on holding a vaccination certificate increases vaccination willingness in both Germany and the United Kingdom. No message has significant positive effects in any other country. Machine learning-based heterogeneity analyses reveal that treatment effects are smaller or even negative in settings marked by high conspiracy beliefs and low health literacy. In contrast, trust in government increases treatment effects in some groups. The heterogeneity in vaccine hesitancy and responses to different messages suggests that health authorities should avoid one-size-fits-all vaccination campaigns.

Identifiers

PMID35476432
PMCPMC9045608

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.