ArticleScientific reports2024
Common measures of vaccination intention generate substantially different estimates that can reduce predictive validity.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychosocial and Social Security Risks Linked to Vaccine Misinformation in Romania: Implications for Vaccination Acceptance and Public Policy.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to adult vaccination among adults and healthcare professionals across Mexico.PloS one · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surveys often estimate vaccination intentions using dichotomous ("Yes"/"No") or trichotomous ("Yes," "Unsure," "No") response options presented in different orders. Do survey results depend on these variations? This controlled experiment randomized participants to dichotomous or trichotomous measures of vaccine intentions (with "Yes" and "No" options presented in different orders). Intentions were measured separately for COVID-19, its booster, and influenza vaccines. Among a sample of U.S. adults (N = 4,764), estimates of vaccine intention varied as much as 37.5 ± 17.4 percentage points as a function of the dichotomous or trichotomous response set. Among participants who had not received the COVID-19 vaccine, the "Unsure" option was more likely to reduce the share of "No" (versus "Yes") responses, whereas among participants who had received the COVID-19 vaccine, the "Unsure" option was more likely to reduce the share of "Yes" (versus "No") responses. The "Unsure" category may increase doubt and decrease reliance on past vaccination behavior when forming intentions. The order of "Yes" and "No" responses had no significant effect. Future research is needed to further evaluate why the effects of including the "Unsure" option vary in direction and magnitude.
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.