Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39492811›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

Readiness for influenza and COVID-19 vaccination in Germany: a comparative analysis.

Anja A Schulz, Yvonne Abt, Linus von Oppen, Markus A Wirtz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

4 authors.

Anja A SchulzResearch Methods in Health Science, University of Education, Freiburg, Germany.
Yvonne AbtResearch Methods in Health Science, University of Education, Freiburg, Germany.
Linus von OppenResearch Methods in Health Science, University of Education, Freiburg, Germany.
Markus A WirtzResearch Methods in Health Science, University of Education, Freiburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Vaccination readiness refers to psychological motives and beliefs that decisively determine individual and collective vaccination prevention behavior. Readiness to be vaccinated depends on expected individual and social benefits and harms. Differences exist in the perception of the threat of potential influenza vs. COVID-19 infection and its significance for the social environment. The study aimed to compare the 7C components of vaccination readiness for influenza and COVID-19 vaccination in adulthood. Methods: A total of 317 adults answered the 7C vaccination readiness scale in two vaccination-specific versions (influenza vs. COVID-19) in an online survey from September 2022 to March 2023. Data were analyzed using repeated measures, including analysis of covariance, correlations, and multiple regression. Results: For COVID-19, there is a higher readiness to be vaccinated compared to influenza regarding Discussion: The 7C subscales reveal a differentiated pattern of readiness for the two vaccination types. This emphasizes the relevance of the multidimensional structure of the construct of vaccination readiness as well as the relevance of moderating effects of the respective vaccination type on the underlying motives and beliefs. Vaccination attitudes are influenced by cultural and social conditions as well as medical standards of care. Comparing attitudes to different vaccinations in different countries thus represents an important research desideratum in order to understand the concept of vaccination readiness more comprehensively.

Indexed as

7C-scalebeliefs about vaccinationcollective responsibilityhealth prevention behaviormotives for vaccinationvaccination hesitancyvaccination readiness

Identifiers

PMID39492811
PMCPMC11528425

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.