ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2023
What drives the vaccination intention against COVID-19? Application of EPPM, TAM, and theories of risk assessment.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interactive, Personalized Patient Decision Aid for COVID-19 Vaccination in Canada: User-Centered Design Approach.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Threat, efficacy, and the ambivalent role of COVID-19 news: an EPPM analysis of health discrimination and preventive behaviors.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- COVID-19 vaccinations among German university students: The role of fear of COVID-19 and risk assessment.PloS one · 2025Article
- An Integrated theoretical framework predicting COVID-19 vaccine behavioral intention among unvaccinated students: A lesson for health educators in future pandemics.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vaccines are widely used to fight against COVID-19. However, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy appears as some individuals are concerned with COVID-19 vaccines. This study investigates the vaccination intention against COVID-19 in China with the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), and theories of risk information assessment. Results showed that the formation mechanism of vaccination intention could be considered a psychological process, as subjective knowledge was a primary influence on correspondents' weighting of both the potentially positive (usefulness) and negative effects (threat) of vaccination. This unequal consideration then resulted in different levels of fear arousal between subjects. Driven by usefulness/threat perception and fear, people conducted different decision strategies, so-called analytical assessment, and experiential assessment to make vaccination decision. In addition to the direct effects of experiential assessment on vaccination intention, two decision strategies and fear arousal also affected people's vaccination intention through the mediation role of vaccination attitude. For policymakers and stakeholders, this study provides a knowledge base for confidence-building, and emotional guidance concerning against COVID-19 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.