Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35573268›Full record

ArticleVaccine: X2022

Predicting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Hong Kong: Vaccine knowledge, risks from coronavirus, and risks and benefits of vaccination.

Stephanie Jean Tsang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine: X, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
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

1 author.

Stephanie Jean TsangDepartment of Communication Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Hongkongers have had access to COVID-19 vaccines for about four months, but vaccination rate remains low (34.4% as of 4 July 2021). Given that vaccine uptake is vital, this study aimed to determine how vaccine-hesitant and vaccinated individuals differ. The study also examined why people choose to delay vaccination (within 1 month, within 2 months, within 3 months, 3 months or more). Material and Methods: A population-based online survey ( Results: With a vaccine hesitancy rate of 30.3%, analyses revealed that sociodemographic factors, party identification and self-reported health status had no effects on the degrees of vaccine hesitancy. While vaccine knowledge, perceived susceptibility to infection, and vaccine efficacy and safety were positive correlates of vaccine uptake, risks from vaccination and vaccine efficacy were positive correlates of vaccine hesitancy. Conclusions: Hesitancy in Hong Kong is more about vaccine efficacy and safety, and less about infection risks. Specifically, respondents expressed concerns about the particular vaccines supplied, especially BioNTech's efficacy and risks from Sinovac. While higher risk motivates longer preparation for vaccine uptake, higher levels of benefits from BioNTech could reduce hesitancy.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19, Coronaricus disease 2019HesitancyHong KongRisks assessmentVaccines

Identifiers

PMID35573268
PMCPMC9077988

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.