ArticleBMC public health2024
The 5 C model and Mpox vaccination behavior in Germany: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mpox Outbreaks Beyond Historically Endemic Regions: A Clinical Review of Vaccination Strategies and Public Health Challenges.Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Evolution of Monkeypox Vaccination Acceptance in Romania: A Comparative Analysis (2022-2025), Psychosocial Perceptions, and the Impact of Anti-Vaccination Rhetoric on Societal Security.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Mpox vaccination hesitancy, previous immunisation coverage, and vaccination readiness in the African region: a multinational survey.EClinicalMedicine · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDue to the authorization of the Mpox vaccines, we aimed to identify determinants of the intention to get vaccinated, actively trying to receive vaccination, and for successfully receiving a vaccination in Germany employing the 5 C model of vaccination readiness.
methodsData stem from a cross-sectional online survey that was available online from August 13, 2022 to August 31, 2022. To assess the influence of the 5 C Model on vaccination behavior, we conducted a multinomial logistic regression.
results3,338 participants responded to the survey, with 487 already vaccinated and 2,066 intending to receive a vaccination. Confidence and collective responsibility were positively associated with intention to get vaccinated, while complacency was negatively correlated. A higher score on the calculation scale increased the odds of intention to receive vaccination but not with actively having tried to receive a vaccination. Fewer perceived constraints were associated with higher odds to be vaccinated. Patients in practices that focus on HIV treatment were more likely to intend to get vaccinated, to have tried to get vaccinated and to be vaccinated, regardless of indication. While level of education had no impact, having an indication to get vaccinated was a strong predictor of vaccination behavior in all groups.
conclusionFuture vaccination campaigns should aim to reduce specific constraints of the target group and make vaccines widely available in primary care institutions beyond HIV-focused practices.
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.