ArticleScientific reports2022
Forecasting sub-national trends in COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK before vaccine rollout.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic trends and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adults in China during 2021-2022: A multilevel analysis based on four national cross-sectional surveys.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Overview of adult immunization in Italy: Successes, lessons learned and the way forward.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Review
- Healthcare workers' views on mandatory SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the UK: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods analysis from the UK-REACH study.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Location, location, location: a discrete choice experiment to inform COVID-19 vaccination programme delivery in the UK.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Self-reported COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake among participants from different racial and ethnic groups in the United States and United Kingdom.Nature communications · 2022Observational
- SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK university students: lessons from September-December 2020 and modelling insights for future student return.Royal Society open science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vaccines have reduced the burden of COVID-19 disease in the UK since their introduction in December 2020. At the time of their introduction, it was unclear the extent to which COVID-19 vaccines would be accepted and how spatial variations in uptake would emerge, driven by socio-demographic characteristics. In this study, data from a large-scale cross-sectional study of over 17,000 adults, surveyed in September and October 2020, was used to provide sub-national forecasts of COVID-19 vaccine uptake across the UK. Bayesian multilevel regression and poststratification was deployed to forecast COVID-19 vaccine acceptance before vaccine rollout across 174 regions of the UK. Although it was found that a majority of the UK adult population would likely take the vaccine, there were substantial heterogeneities in uptake intent across the UK. Large urban areas, including London and North West England, females, Black or Black British ethnicities, and Polish speakers were among the least likely to state an intent to vaccinate. These predicted spatial trends were validated by comparison to observed observed COVID-19 vaccine uptake in late 2021. The methodological approaches deployed in this validated forecasting study may be replicable for the prediction of routine childhood immunisation uptake. Given recent pandemic-induced disruptions to routine immunisation systems, reliable sub-national forecasts of vaccine uptake may provide policymakers and stakeholders early warning signals of potential vaccine confidence issues.
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.