Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37352321›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Correlates of support for international vaccine solidarity during the COVID-19 pandemic: Cross-sectional survey evidence from Germany.

Florian Stoeckel, Jack Thompson, Paula Szewach, Sabrina Stöckli, Matthew Barnfield, Joseph B Phillips, Benjamin Lyons, Vittorio Mérola, Jason Reifler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Florian StoeckelThe Department of Social and Political Sciences, Philosophy and Anthropology, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8937-5962
Jack ThompsonThe Department of Social and Political Sciences, Philosophy and Anthropology, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Paula SzewachThe Department of Social and Political Sciences, Philosophy and Anthropology, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Sabrina StöckliDepartment of Consumer Behavior, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Matthew BarnfieldDepartment of Government, University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom.
Joseph B PhillipsSchool of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Benjamin LyonsDepartment of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States of America.
Vittorio MérolaSchool of Government and International Affairs, Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom.
Jason ReiflerThe Department of Social and Political Sciences, Philosophy and Anthropology, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.

Funding

European Research Council 682758
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many residents of high-income countries (HICs) were eligible for COVID-19 vaccine boosters, while many residents of lower-income countries (LICs) had not yet received a first dose. HICs made some efforts to contribute to COVID-19 vaccination efforts in LICs, but these efforts were limited in scale. A new literature discusses the normative importance of an international redistribution of vaccines. Our analysis contributes an empirical perspective on the willingness of citizens in a HIC to contribute to such efforts (which we term international vaccine solidarity). We analyse the levels and predictors of international vaccine solidarity. We surveyed a representative sample of German adults (n = 2019) who participated in a two-wave YouGov online survey (w1: Sep 13-21, 2021 and w2: Oct 4-13, 2021). International vaccine solidarity is measured by asking respondents preferences for sharing vaccine supplies internationally versus using that supply as boosters for the domestic population. We examine a set of pre-registered hypotheses. Almost half of the respondents in our sample (48%) prioritize giving doses to citizens in less developed countries. A third of respondents (33%) prefer to use available doses as boosters domestically, and a fifth of respondents (19%) did not report a preference. In line with our hypotheses, respondents higher in cosmopolitanism and empathy, and those who support domestic redistribution exhibit more support for international dose-sharing. Older respondents (who might be more at risk) do not consistently show less support for vaccine solidarity. These results help us to get a better understanding of the way citizens' form preferences about a mechanism that redistributes medical supplies internationally during a global crisis.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesAdultCOVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesGermanyHumansPandemicsVaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccines

Identifiers

PMID37352321
PMCPMC10289341

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.