Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36146562›Full record

ArticleVaccines2022

The Dynamic Relationship between the Intention and Final Decision for the COVID-19 Booster: A Study among Students and Staff at the University of Liège, Belgium.

Marine Paridans, Justine Monseur, Anne-Françoise Donneau, Nicolas Gillain, Eddy Husson, Dieudonné Leclercq, Christelle Meuris, Gilles Darcis, Michel Moutschen, Claude Saegerman and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

14 authors.

Marine ParidansPublic Health Department, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Justine MonseurBiostatistics Unit-Public Health Department, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Anne-Françoise DonneauBiostatistics Unit-Public Health Department, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Nicolas GillainPublic Health Department, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9487-5139
Eddy HussonPublic Health Department, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Dieudonné LeclercqPublic Health Department, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Christelle MeurisInfectious Diseases Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Gilles DarcisInfectious Diseases Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8192-1351
Michel MoutschenInfectious Diseases Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Claude SaegermanFundamental and Applied Research for Animal and Health (FARAH) Center, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9087-7436
Laurent GilletLaboratory of Immunology-Vaccinology, FARAH, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1047-2525
Fabrice BureauLaboratory of Cellular and Molecular Immunology, GIGA Institute, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-6264-4029
Michèle GuillaumePublic Health Department, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Benoit PétréPublic Health Department, Liège University, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-5344-4401

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While many studies have documented the intentions for the COVID-19 vaccine booster, few have explored the change from intention to final decision. This study explores the COVID-19 booster intentions and the change from intention to decision in a primo-vaccinated university population, with a distinction between staff members and students. It looks at the sociodemographic and medical characteristics, health literacy, personal COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, and attitudes/intentions regarding the booster, among the 1030 participants (64.4% staff members, 61.3% female, median age 36.0 years). Of the 8.7% who were initially hesitant, 72.7% ultimately got a booster and 27.3% did not. Another 84.2% intended to get a booster and 7.1% did not. Among the latter two groups, 88.9% maintained their intention and 11.1% changed their minds. The determinants associated with the intentions were health literacy and previous intentions regarding the COVID-19 primo-vaccination. The determinants associated with the change to non-vaccination were a previous COVID-19 infection, a past COVID-19 primo-vaccination intention, and a neutralizing antibody level. The results point to an opening for the support in decision-making, with a significant percentage of the study population potentially changing their mind between intention and final decision; this process should start early and be tailored to the individual's COVID-19 history. A personalized approach seems necessary in order to ensure that individuals make an informed choice.

Indexed as

academic populationCOVID-19intention and final COVID-19 booster statuspreventionpublic health

Identifiers

PMID36146562
PMCPMC9501467

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.