Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39983109›Full record

ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2025

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccination Intention and Behavior Among Young People in a European Union Country With Low COVID-19 Vaccination Rates: Cross-Sectional Study.

Sara Atanasova, Tanja Kamin, Nina Perger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Sara AtanasovaFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0003-4162-1367
Tanja KaminFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0002-9498-9301
Nina PergerFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0003-4509-6029

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVaccination against COVID-19 is a critical measure for managing the pandemic and achieving herd immunity. In 2021, Slovenia had a significantly lower COVID-19 vaccination rate compared to the average rate in the European Union, with individuals aged younger than 37 years showing the highest hesitancy. Previous studies primarily explored vaccination willingness before vaccines were available to young people, leaving a gap in understanding the factors influencing vaccination behavior and differences within the population of young people.

objectiveThis study aimed to investigate a wide set of predictors influencing COVID-19 vaccination intention and behavior among young people in Slovenia. Specifically, we aimed to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated young people, further categorizing the unvaccinated group into those who were hesitant, those who intended to vaccinate in the near future, and those who refused vaccination.

methodsAn integrated model, based on the health belief model and theory of planned behavior, was developed, and it included additional contextual factors (such as trust in science, trust in vaccines, conspiracy theory tendencies, etc) and health-related and sociodemographic characteristics. Data were collected in August 2021 via the online access survey panel JazVem (Valicon), targeting individuals aged 15-30 years in Slovenia. Quotas ensured that the sample (n=507) was quasi-representative according to age, gender, education, and region. Bivariate analyses and multinomial logistic regression were performed to explore the determinants of vaccination intention and behavior.

resultsAmong respondents, 45.8% (232/507) were vaccinated, 30.0% (152/507) refused vaccination, 12.4% (63/507) were hesitant, and 11.8% (60/507) intended to undergo vaccination in the near future. Vaccinated individuals were predominantly aged 23-26 years, had higher education, and reported above-average material status. Refusers were more common among the youngest (15-18 years) and oldest (27-30 years) groups, had lower education, and showed higher conspiracy theory tendencies. Multinomial regression analysis revealed that unvaccinated respondents who perceived greater COVID-19-related health consequences were more likely to delay vaccination (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.0, 95% CI 1.2-3.3) or exhibit hesitancy (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.2) compared with vaccinated respondents. Subjective norms were less influential among hesitant individuals (aOR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.7) and refusers (aOR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.7) than among vaccinated individuals. Self-efficacy in managing health problems was less evident among those who delayed vaccination to the near future (aOR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.9) than among vaccinated individuals.

conclusionsThis study underscores the complexity of vaccination intentions and behaviors among young people, emphasizing the necessity for public health strategies promoting vaccination to be tailored to the specific reasons for nonvaccination within different subgroups. Interventions aimed at addressing vaccine hesitancy and delays should particularly focus on individuals with lower education and material disadvantages. By fostering trust and enhancing self-efficacy, these interventions could more effectively promote vaccine uptake.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesIntentionVaccinationVaccination HesitancyAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEuropean UnionFemaleHumansMaleSARS-CoV-2SloveniaSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19 vaccinehealth belief modeltheory of planned behaviorvaccine uptakeyoung people

Identifiers

PMID39983109
PMCPMC11890135

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.