ArticlePLOS global public health2024
Preferences regarding COVID-19 vaccination among 12,000 adults in China: A cross-sectional discrete choice experiment.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments on Preferences for COVID-19 Vaccinations.The patient · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of Scalable, Wordless, Short, Animated Storytelling Videos on Flu Vaccine Hesitancy in China: Nationwide, Single-Blind, Parallel-Group, Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding public preferences concerning vaccination is critical to inform pandemic response strategies. To investigate Chinese adults' preferences regarding COVID-19 vaccine attributes, we conducted a cross-sectional online survey in 12,000 Chinese adults in June-July, 2021. Participants were requested to answer a series of discrete choice questions related to hypothetical COVID-19 vaccines. Using mixed logit models, our analysis revealed that participants had a higher preference for COVID-19 vaccines with longer duration of protection (coefficient: 1.272, 95% confidence interval [1.016 to 1.529]) and higher efficacy (coefficient: 1.063, [0.840, 1.287]). Conversely, participants demonstrated a lower preference associated with higher risk of rare but serious side-effects (coefficient: -1.158, [-1.359, -0.958]), oral administration (coefficient: -0.211, [-0.377, -0.046]), more doses (coefficient: -0.148, [-0.296, 0.000]) and imported origin (coefficient: -0.653, [-0.864, -0.443]). Moreover, preferences were heterogeneous by individual factors: highly educated participants were more sensitive to the negative vaccine attributes including price (coefficient -0.312, [-0.370, -0.253]) and imported vaccine (coefficient -0.941, [-1.186, -0.697]); there was also substantial heterogeneity in vaccine preferences with respect to age group, marital status, work status, income, chronic diagnosis history, COVID-19 vaccination history and geographic regions. As the first study of examining the public preferences for COVID-19 vaccine in China with a large nationwide sample of 12,000 adults, our results indicate that future vaccine should pose lower risk, possess longer protection period, have higher efficacy, be domestically produced, and have lower costs to increase the COVID-19 vaccination coverage. Our current study findings from this study provide insights and recommendations for not only COVID-19 vaccine design but also vaccine attribute preferences to increase vaccine uptake in potential future pandemics.
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.