ArticleBMC public health2026
How can influenza vaccination be promoted among adults in China? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment.
Article in BMC 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe influenza vaccination rate remains low in China, especially among younger adults aged 18 to 60 years old. This study aimed to estimate public preferences for influenza vaccines and to identify attributes that maximize vaccination rates.
methodsThis study utilized a discrete choice experiment to estimate the relative importance (RI) of seven influenza vaccine-related attributes, including effectiveness, protection duration, risk of severe side effects, recommendation source, manufacturer's location, vaccination site, and out-of-pocket cost. Participants were recruited from eight community healthcare centers in four cities and surveys were conducted face-to-face. A mixed logit model was employed to estimate the preference coefficient and marginal willingness to pay (mWTP) and to predict the uptake rate. The interaction effects were included to explore how individual characteristics might influence preference heterogeneity.
resultsA total of 802 participants completed the survey, with 618 included in the data analysis. The analysis showed that six of the seven attributes significantly influenced vaccination preferences, with the exception of vaccination site. Participants assigned the highest value to the risk of severe side effects (RI = 31.50%), followed by out-of-pocket costs (RI = 24.46%) and effectiveness (RI = 20.39%). The highest mWTP ($30.62) was observed when the risk of severe side effects was reduced from 5/100,000 to 1/100,000. Participants' preferences varied depending on their age, education, residence, occupation, and income. By providing a cost-free influenza vaccine and maintaining all other attributes at the baseline, a higher vaccination rate of up to 77.9% will be achieved.
conclusionsVaccine side effects, cost, and effectiveness were key determinants of influenza vaccine preference. Inclusion of the influenza vaccine in the national immunization program, making it freely available, holds promise for increasing vaccination rates.
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.