ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
Identifying conditions for a third dose intention of COVID-19 vaccination in college students: A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is Covid-19 "vaccine uptake" in postsecondary education a "problem"? A critical policy inquiry.Health (London, England : 1997) · 2024Article
- Driving factors of urban community epidemic prevention and control capability: QCA analysis based on typical cases of 20 anti-epidemic communities in China.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: During the pandemic, a third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine effectively reduces the proportion of severe cases in those infected, but vaccine hesitancy impedes this reasonable prevention method. Epidemic control in China is being tested due to the large population base, especially in crowded places like college campuses. This study aimed to explore the configuration paths of psychological antecedents for college students to receive a third COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was carried out in five universities in Wuhan using convenience sampling. A long version of the 5C 7-point Likert scale was used to measure college students' intention and psychological antecedents on the third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. A fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) approach was performed to explore the configuration of conditions to the vaccination willingness. Results: 31.67% of respondents surveyed did not receive their third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. The score of intention to get the vaccine for college students who did not receive the booster vaccine was 4.93 (±1.68). Average scores of 5.19 (±1.24), 4.35 (±1.75), 4.02 (±1.45), 5.84 (±1.23), and 4.61(±1.32) were reported for confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility in them. QCA showed high confidence and collective responsibility playing a central role in third dose vaccination intention. Meanwhile, low confidence and collective responsibility are the core conditions of low vaccination willingness. Conclusion: Eliminating vaccine hesitancy necessitates focusing on the psychological antecedents of vaccination intentions to identify critical targets for policy and interventions. This study identified trust and collective responsibility are core elements of the psychological antecedents of college students' intention to receive the booster vaccine for COVID-19. To achieve herd immunity as soon as possible, health administration and campus can start with vaccine confidence-building and collective responsibility cultivation to take appropriate actions and measures to improve coverage of the booster vaccination.
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.