For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
5
views
66
references
 Top references
cited by
44
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      73
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Correlates of intended COVID-19 vaccine acceptance across time and countries: results from a series of cross-sectional surveys

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          Describe demographical, social and psychological correlates of willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

          Setting

          Series of online surveys undertaken between March and October 2020.

          Participants

          A total of 25 separate national samples (matched to country population by age and sex) in 12 different countries were recruited through online panel providers (n=25 334).

          Primary outcome measures

          Reported willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccination.

          Results

          Reported willingness to receive a vaccine varied widely across samples, ranging from 63% to 88%. Multivariate logistic regression analyses reveal sex (female OR=0.59, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.64), trust in medical and scientific experts (OR=1.28, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.34) and worry about the COVID-19 virus (OR=1.47, 95% CI 1.41 to 1.53) as the strongest correlates of stated vaccine acceptance considering pooled data and the most consistent correlates across countries. In a subset of UK samples, we show that these effects are robust after controlling for attitudes towards vaccination in general.

          Conclusions

          Our results indicate that the burden of trust largely rests on the shoulders of the scientific and medical community, with implications for how future COVID-19 vaccination information should be communicated to maximise uptake.

          Related collections

          Most cited references66

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

          Jay Bavel, Katherine Baicker, Paulo S Boggio … (2020)
          The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.
          Article 0 comments Cited 1810 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine

            Jeffrey V Lazarus, Scott C Ratzan, Adam Palayew … (2020)
            Several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently in human trials. In June 2020, we surveyed 13,426 people in 19 countries to determine potential acceptance rates and factors influencing acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, and 61.4% reported that they would accept their employer’s recommendation to do so. Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia). Respondents reporting higher levels of trust in information from government sources were more likely to accept a vaccine and take their employer’s advice to do so.
            Article 0 comments Cited 1225 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker)

              Thomas C. Hale, Noam Angrist, Rafael Goldszmidt … (2021)
              COVID-19 has prompted unprecedented government action around the world. We introduce the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT), a dataset that addresses the need for continuously updated, readily usable and comparable information on policy measures. From 1 January 2020, the data capture government policies related to closure and containment, health and economic policy for more than 180 countries, plus several countries' subnational jurisdictions. Policy responses are recorded on ordinal or continuous scales for 19 policy areas, capturing variation in degree of response. We present two motivating applications of the data, highlighting patterns in the timing of policy adoption and subsequent policy easing and reimposition, and illustrating how the data can be combined with behavioural and epidemiological indicators. This database enables researchers and policymakers to explore the empirical effects of policy responses on the spread of COVID-19 cases and deaths, as well as on economic and social welfare.
              Article 0 comments Cited 1219 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMJ Open
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMJ Open
                Journal ID (hwp): bmjopen
                Journal ID (publisher-id): bmjopen
                Title: BMJ Open
                Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                ISSN (Electronic): 2044-6055
                Publication date Collection: 2021
                Publication date (Electronic): 2 August 2021
                Publication date PMC-release: 2 August 2021
                Volume: 11
                Issue: 8
                Electronic Location Identifier: e048025
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentWinton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication , University of Cambridge , Cambridge, UK
                [2 ]departmentDepartment of Psychology , University of Cambridge , Cambridge, UK
                [3 ]departmentCenter of Environmental and Climate Sciences , Lund University , Lund, Sweden
                [4 ]departmentBordeaux Population Health Research Center, U1219, Inserm , University of Bordeaux , Bordeaux, France
                [5 ]departmentPole de Sante Publique , Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux , Bordeaux, France
                [6 ]departmentDirection de la prévention - promotion de la santé , Santé publique France , Saint-Maurice, France
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr John R Kerr; jk802@ 123456cam.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6606-5507
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6612-5186
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0210-8635
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7772-8492
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2932-6253
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2442-4476
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4115-161X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0269-1744
                Article
                Publisher ID: bmjopen-2020-048025
                DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048025
                PMC ID: 8331327
                PubMed ID: 34341047
                SO-VID: be3011fc-269e-4da6-b35f-97bd887d7396
                Copyright © © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
                License:

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                Date received : 21 December 2020
                Date accepted : 08 July 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: David and Claudia Harding Foundation;
                Categories
                Subject: Public Health
                Subject: 1506
                Subject: 2474
                Subject: 1724
                Series title: Original research
                Custom metadata
                special-feature unlocked

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Medicine
                Keywords: covid-19,public health,preventive medicine
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Medicine
                Keywords: covid-19, public health, preventive medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content73

                See all similar

                Cited by44

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors1,844

                See all reference authors