Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36599156›Full record

ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2023

Preference and Willingness to Pay for the Regular COVID-19 Booster Shot in the Vietnamese Population: Theory-Driven Discrete Choice Experiment.

Bach Xuan Tran, Anh Linh Do, Laurent Boyer, Pascal Auquier, Huong Thi Le, Minh Ngoc Le Vu, Trang Huyen Thi Dang, Khuy Minh Cao, Linh Dieu Thi Le, Lam Tung Ngoc Cu and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

17 authors.

Bach Xuan Tran *Institute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0003-3498-8224
Anh Linh Do *SC Johnson College of Business, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9320-048X
Laurent BoyerResearch Centre on Health Services and Quality of Life, Aix Marseille University, Marseille, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1229-6622
Pascal AuquierResearch Centre on Health Services and Quality of Life, Aix Marseille University, Marseille, France.ORCID 0000-0003-3496-1996
Huong Thi LeInstitute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0001-6442-8100
Minh Ngoc Le VuInstitute of Health Economics and Technology, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0003-3886-4851
Trang Huyen Thi DangInstitute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0001-5906-690X
Khuy Minh CaoInstitute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0002-3224-7919
Linh Dieu Thi LeInstitute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0002-7199-3607
Lam Tung Ngoc CuInstitute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0003-1709-8684
Bang Viet LyInstitute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0002-9641-7382
Duong Anh Thi NguyenInstitute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0002-9548-0937
Manh Duc NguyenInstitute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0002-5257-9822
Carl A LatkinBloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7931-2116
Roger C M HoDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-9629-4493
Cyrus S H HoInstitute for Health Innovation and Technology (iHealthtech), National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-7092-9566
Melvyn W B ZhangLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-8385-2345

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 booster vaccination rate has declined despite the wide availability of vaccines. As COVID-19 is becoming endemic and charges for regular booster vaccination are being introduced, measuring public acceptance and the willingness to pay for regular COVID-19 boosters is ever more crucial.

objectiveThis study aims to (1) investigate public acceptance for regular COVID-19 boosters, (2) assess the willingness to pay for a COVID-19 booster shot, and (3) identify factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. Our results will provide crucial insights into and implications for policy response as well as the development of a feasible and effective vaccination campaign during Vietnam's waning vaccine immunity period.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among 871 Vietnamese online participants from April to August 2022. An online questionnaire based on the discrete choice experiment (DCE) design was developed, distributed using the snowball sampling method, and subsequently conjointly analyzed on the Qualtrics platform. A history of COVID-19 infection and vaccination, health status, willingness to vaccinate, willingness to pay, and other factors were examined.

resultsAmong the participants, 761 (87.4%) had received or were waiting for a COVID-19 booster shot. However, the willingness to pay was low at US $8.02, and most participants indicated an unwillingness to pay (n=225, 25.8%) or a willingness to pay for only half of the vaccine costs (n=222, 25.4%). Although information insufficiency and a wariness toward vaccines were factors most associated with the unwillingness to pay, long-term side effects, immunity duration, and mortality rate were the attributes the participants were most concerned with during the vaccine decision-making period. Participants who had children less than 18 years old in their homes infected with COVID-19 had a lower willingness to pay (odds ratio [OR] 0.54, 95% CI 0.39-0.74). Respondents who had children under 12 years old in their family who received at least 1 vaccine dose had a higher willingness to pay (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.12-3.66). The burden of medical expenses (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.25-0.45) and fear of the vaccine (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-1.00) were negative factors associated with the level of willingness to pay.

conclusionsA significant inconsistency between high acceptance and a low willingness to pay underscores the role of vaccine information and public trust. In addition to raising awareness about the most concerning characteristics of the COVID-19 booster, social media and social listening should be used in collaboration with health professionals to establish a 2-way information exchange. Work incentives and suitable mandates should continue to encourage workforce participation. Most importantly, all interventions should be conducted with informational transparency to strengthen trust between the public and authorities.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdolescentChildCOVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHumansImmunization, SecondarySoutheast Asian PeopleVietnamCOVID-19 VaccinesacceptabilityboosterCOVID-19epidemicfeasibilityinfectioninterventionpolicysocial mediavaccinationvaccineVietnamwillingness to paywillingness to take

Identifiers

PMID36599156
PMCPMC9891355

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.