Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41150409›Full record

ArticleVaccines2025

What Drives Vaccine Uptake?-Investigating the Application of the Health Belief Model Through a Longitudinal Cohort Study During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Victoria, Australia.

Anita Voloshin, Aimée Altermatt, Anna Wilkinson, Katherine B Gibney, Sophie Hill, Jessica Kaufman, Rebecca E Ryan, Margie Danchin, Alisa Pedrana, Margaret E Hellard and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Anita VoloshinBurnet Institute, 85 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Aimée AltermattBurnet Institute, 85 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Anna WilkinsonBurnet Institute, 85 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4475-5224
Katherine B GibneyPeter Doherty Institute for Infection & Immunity, The University of Melbourne, 792 Elizabeth Street, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5851-5339
Sophie HillCentre for Health Communication and Participation, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3086, Australia.
Jessica KaufmanMurdoch Children's Research Institute, 50 Flemington Road, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Rebecca E RyanCentre for Health Communication and Participation, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3086, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9097-2078
Margie DanchinMurdoch Children's Research Institute, 50 Flemington Road, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7624-5691
Alisa PedranaBurnet Institute, 85 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Margaret E HellardBurnet Institute, 85 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Katherine HeathBurnet Institute, 85 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4752-9732

Funding

Macquarie Group Foundation N/AVictorian Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesUnderstanding the psychological determinants of vaccine uptake is critical for effective public health strategies, particularly during prolonged pandemics. The Health Belief Model is widely used to examine vaccine behavior, yet its applicability in longitudinal and policy-intensive contexts remains underexplored. This study assessed how two core Health Belief Model constructs-perceived severity of and susceptibility to COVID-19-related to vaccine intentions and uptake over time, and how these perceptions varied by demographic characteristics.

methodsData came from Optimise, a longitudinal cohort study of adults in Victoria, Australia, conducted between September 2020 and August 2022. Perceived severity of and susceptibility to COVID-19 were measured monthly, alongside COVID-19 vaccine intentions and uptake. Generalized Estimating Equations evaluated associations between these two Health Belief Model constructs and vaccine outcomes over time. Separate models identified demographic predictors of perceived severity and susceptibility.

resultsPerceived severity of COVID-19 was positively associated with intention to receive further COVID-19 vaccine doses (OR = 2.53, 95% CI: 1.26-5.07) and the total vaccine doses received (OR = 2.74, 95% CI: 1.58-4.76), with these associations changing over time as vaccine mandates were lifted and the pandemic context evolved. Perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 showed no significant associations with vaccine outcomes. Older age, presence of a chronic health condition, and lower employment status was associated with higher perceived severity. In contrast, perceived susceptibility was higher among high-income earners but lower among older adults and the unemployed.

conclusionsThe predictive value of two Health Belief Model constructs was context- and time-dependent. Perceived severity consistently predicted vaccine uptake once mandates were lifted, while susceptibility did not. Our findings highlight the importance of context-sensitive behavioral frameworks when designing vaccine promotion strategies during extended public health crises.

Indexed as

behavioral health theoryCOVID-19 vaccine uptakehealth belief modellongitudinal cohort studypandemic responsepublic health communicationrisk perceptionvaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID41150409
PMCPMC12568295

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.