ArticleBMJ public health2026
Trusting science and authority in times of crisis: exploring vaccine confidence across Southeast Asia.
Article in BMJ public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Availability of trustworthy information has a critical role during public health emergency events. Science communication and trust in information sources, health experts and governments significantly influence public adherence to preventive measures and vaccine uptake. To investigate these effects on vaccine confidence in Southeast Asia, a region with diverse governance structures, trust levels and health literacy, this study examines trust in science and authority across six countries. Methods: Between January and June 2023, we conducted online surveys in Singapore, Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam with a total of 6611 respondents to measure their attitudes and trust towards science, vaccines, the government's management of COVID-19 and international health institutions. Results: Our analyses explored the relationship between population trust in science, authorities and vaccine confidence. We found generally high trust in science and authority, along with strong confidence in vaccines. Trust in science increased by 0.98 (95% CI 0.93 to 1.03) for every unit increase in trust in government. Trust in information from medical staff and scientists was highest, while information from politicians and social media was least trusted. We found a positive association between the three indices across some, but not all countries. The perception of scientific support for the vaccine rollout was positively associated with vaccine confidence in nearly all contexts, with effect sizes ranging from 0.55 (in Thailand and Indonesia) to 1.07 (in Singapore). Conclusion: Our findings indicate that to enhance resilience against future public health emergencies and improve adherence to directives for non-urgent health concerns, health authorities should focus on communicating scientific support behind health guidelines and build trust in science and authority in the long term.
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.