ArticlePloS one2024
Spatiotemporal dynamic and regional differences of public attention to vaccination: An empirical study in China.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Spatial accessibility analysis of vaccination units in Gansu Province, China (2025).Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- The mutualistic symbiosis of public and scientific attention in science communication.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Enhancing rural veterinary governance: coupling veterinary human resources with public attention to animal welfare.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInternet searches offer an indicator of public attention and possible demand for certain things. Studying the spatiotemporal characteristics of the public's concern for vaccination can determine the spatiotemporal distribution of demand for vaccines in China, and capture the changes in the health awareness of the Chinese population, thus informing future vaccination strategies.
methodsBased on the collection of Baidu search indices for vaccination-related keywords in 363 cities in China, This paper seeks to explore the spatiotemporal changes and regional differences in public attention toward vaccination in China by using the seasonal index, seasonal concentration index, Herfindahl index, Moran index, and Dagum Gini coefficient.
resultsThe following findings are presented. First, there are significant seasonal fluctuations and unbalanced monthly distributions of vaccination-related public attention in China. Second, the public attention in Chinese cities shows the spatial characteristics of "leading in the east, followed by the central, western and northeastern regions". The spatial correlation of attention has been strengthened, and the high-high clusters are mainly distributed in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei (BTH), Yangtze River Delta (YRD), and Greater Bay Area (GBA) urban agglomerations. Third, regional differences in overall public attention narrowed in China, with intra-regional differences narrowing in seven regions (Northwest China, Central China, and so on), and intra-regional differences increasing in East China. The dominant role in the Gini coefficient changes from transvariation intensity to inter-regional differences.
conclusionMajor public health emergencies stimulate the public's attention to health topics. Although the short-term increase in vaccination-related public attention was not observed to translate into a long-term increase in public vaccine literacy, the seasonal and regional differences in vaccination-related public attention in China have significantly narrowed before and after COVID-19, suggesting that the imbalance between public health literacy levels has improved.
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.