Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35640203›Full record

ArticleAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2022

Do Side Effects to the Primary COVID-19 Vaccine Reduce Intentions for a COVID-19 Vaccine Booster?

Andrew L Geers, Kelly S Clemens, Ben Colagiuri, Emily Jason, Luana Colloca, Rebecca Webster, Lene Vase, Mette Seig, Kate Faasse

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The Nocebo Effect.Annual review of pharmacology and toxicology · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Andrew L GeersDepartment of Psychology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4413-7098
Kelly S ClemensDepartment of Psychology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Ben ColagiuriSchool of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2157-2641
Emily JasonDepartment of Psychology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Luana CollocaDepartments of Pain and Translational Symptom Science, University of Maryland, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6503-4709
Rebecca WebsterDepartment of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5136-1098
Lene VaseDepartment of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Mette SeigDepartment of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Kate FaasseSchool of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
University of Toledo · USAarhus University · DKThe University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Sheffield · GBUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVaccines are being administered worldwide to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccine boosters are essential for maintaining immunity and protecting against virus variants. The side effects of the primary COVID-19 vaccine (e.g., headache, nausea), however, could reduce intentions to repeat the vaccination experience, thereby hindering global inoculation efforts. PURPOSE: The aim of this research was to test whether side effects of a primary COVID-19 vaccine relate to reduced intentions to receive a COVID-19 booster. The secondary aim was to test whether psychological and demographic factors predict booster intentions.

methodsSecondary data analyses were conducted on a U.S. national sample of 551 individuals recruited through the online platform Prolific. Key measures in the dataset were side effects reported from a primary COVID-19 vaccination and subsequent intentions to receive a booster vaccine. Psychological and demographic variables that predicted primary vaccination intentions in prior studies were also measured.

resultsBooster intentions were high. COVID-19 booster vaccine intentions were uncorrelated with the number of side effects, intensity of side effects, or occurrence of an intense side effect from the primary COVID-19 vaccine. Correlational and regression analyses indicated intentions for a booster vaccination increased with positive vaccination attitudes, trust in vaccine development, worry about the COVID-19 pandemic, low concern over vaccine side effects, and democratic political party affiliation.

conclusionsSide effects of a primary COVID-19 vaccine were not directly associated with lower intentions to receive a booster of the COVID-19 vaccine early in the pandemic. However, many variables that predict primary vaccination intentions also predict booster intentions.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansImmunization, SecondaryIntentionPandemicsCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesBoosterCOVID-19IntentionsReactogenicitySide effectsVaccine

Identifiers

PMID35640203
PMCPMC9275396
OpenAlexW4281732823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.