Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36589991›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine booster dose and associated factors among the elderly in China based on the health belief model (HBM): A national cross-sectional study.

Chenyuan Qin, Wenxin Yan, Min Du, Qiao Liu, Liyuan Tao, Min Liu, Jue Liu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chenyuan QinDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Wenxin YanDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Min DuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Qiao LiuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Liyuan TaoResearch Center of Clinical Epidemiology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Min LiuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Jue LiuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Peking University · CNNational Health and Family Planning Commission · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The reluctance of individuals to obtain solid vaccine-induced immunity represents a fundamental challenge to containing the spread of SARS-CoV-2, including its highly mutated variants. We aimed to assess vaccination acceptance and associated factors for the COVID-19 vaccine booster dose among elderly people (≥60 years old) in China, providing a theoretical and practical reference for universal vaccination policy. Methods: A national anonymous survey was conducted in mainland China from May 25 to June 8, 2022, using a stratified random sampling method. Individuals 60 years of age and above were the target population. A chi-squared test and Cochran-Armitage test for trend were used to compare and examine vaccine acceptance rates by characteristics. Results: Of 3,321 eligible participants, 82.8% (95% CI: 81.5-84.1%) were willing to receive COVID-19 vaccine booster shots. Concerns about contraindications (38.3%), vaccine safety (32.0%), and limited movement (28.0%) were the main reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Nearly one-third still believed that the booster dose was unnecessary after receiving the initial vaccination. Older adults with a low level of perceived barriers (aOR = 1.86, 95% CI, 1.03-3.38), a high level of perceived benefit (aOR = 2.31, 95% CI, 1.38-3.87), and higher cues to action (moderate, aOR = 2.22, 95% CI, 1.39-3.56; high, aOR = 5.46, 95% CI: 3.44-8.67) were more likely to accept the booster dose. Other major factors affecting the booster dose acceptance rate were occupation, time spent on social media, vaccination history, and a high knowledge score for COVID-19 and vaccines. In addition, for those over 70 years of age, rising awareness of susceptibility could be a better gateway for improving their willingness to get vaccinated. Conclusions: A total of 82.8% of recruited older adults were willing to receive the booster dose. Acceptance behaviors were closely related to occupation, time spent on social media, vaccination history, knowledge factors, perception of barriers, and benefit, as well as action cues. Targeted public health measures are a priority for improving the vaccination coverage of valid immunity among the elderly population, not only to prevent infection and poor prognosis caused by emerging variants but also to reduce the huge disease and economic burden caused by the long-term sequelae after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Indexed as

COVID-19AgedAged, 80 and overChinaCOVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHealth Belief ModelHumansImmunization, SecondaryMiddle AgedSARS-CoV-2COVID-19 Vaccinesbooster doseCOVID-19hesitancyold peoplevaccination

Identifiers

PMID36589991
PMCPMC9797829
OpenAlexW4311507089

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.