Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Monetary incentives increase COVID-19 vaccinations

      research-article

      Read this article at

      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.

          Valuing vaccination

          Using money as a motivation for the public to get vaccinated is controversial and has had mixed results in studies, few of which have been randomized trials. To test the effect of money as an incentive to obtain a vaccine, Campos-Mercade et al. set up a study in Sweden in 2021, when various age groups were first made eligible to receive the severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 vaccine (see the Perspective by Jecker). The effect of a small cash reward, around US $24, was compared with the effect of several behavioral nudges. The outcome of this preregistered, randomized clinical trial was that money had the power to increase participation by about 4 percentage points. Nudging and reminding didn’t seem to be deleterious and even had a small positive effect. Of course, the question of whether it is ethical to pay people to be vaccinated like this needs to be addressed. —CA

          Abstract

          In Sweden, monetary incentives of US $24 increased vaccination rates from approximately 72% to approximately 76%.

          Abstract

          The stalling of COVID-19 vaccination rates threatens public health. To increase vaccination rates, governments across the world are considering the use of monetary incentives. Here we present evidence about the effect of guaranteed payments on COVID-19 vaccination uptake. We ran a large preregistered randomized controlled trial (with 8286 participants) in Sweden and linked the data to population-wide administrative vaccination records. We found that modest monetary payments of 24 US dollars (200 Swedish kronor) increased vaccination rates by 4.2 percentage points ( P = 0.005), from a baseline rate of 71.6%. By contrast, behavioral nudges increased stated intentions to become vaccinated but had only small and not statistically significant impacts on vaccination rates. The results highlight the potential of modest monetary incentives to raise vaccination rates.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

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

          Impact and effectiveness of mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19 cases, hospitalisations, and deaths following a nationwide vaccination campaign in Israel: an observational study using national surveillance data

          Background Following the emergency use authorisation of the Pfizer–BioNTech mRNA COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 (international non-proprietary name tozinameran) in Israel, the Ministry of Health (MoH) launched a campaign to immunise the 6·5 million residents of Israel aged 16 years and older. We estimated the real-world effectiveness of two doses of BNT162b2 against a range of SARS-CoV-2 outcomes and to evaluate the nationwide public-health impact following the widespread introduction of the vaccine. Methods We used national surveillance data from the first 4 months of the nationwide vaccination campaign to ascertain incident cases of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and outcomes, as well as vaccine uptake in residents of Israel aged 16 years and older. Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 outcomes (asymptomatic infection, symptomatic infection, and COVID-19-related hospitalisation, severe or critical hospitalisation, and death) was calculated on the basis of incidence rates in fully vaccinated individuals (defined as those for whom 7 days had passed since receiving the second dose of vaccine) compared with rates in unvaccinated individuals (who had not received any doses of the vaccine), with use of a negative binomial regression model adjusted for age group (16–24, 25–34, 35–44, 45–54, 55–64, 65–74, 75–84, and ≥85 years), sex, and calendar week. The proportion of spike gene target failures on PCR test among a nationwide convenience-sample of SARS-CoV-2-positive specimens was used to estimate the prevelance of the B.1.1.7 variant. Findings During the analysis period (Jan 24 to April 3, 2021), there were 232 268 SARS-CoV-2 infections, 7694 COVID-19 hospitalisations, 4481 severe or critical COVID-19 hospitalisations, and 1113 COVID-19 deaths in people aged 16 years or older. By April 3, 2021, 4 714 932 (72·1%) of 6 538 911 people aged 16 years and older were fully vaccinated with two doses of BNT162b2. Adjusted estimates of vaccine effectiveness at 7 days or longer after the second dose were 95·3% (95% CI 94·9–95·7; incidence rate 91·5 per 100 000 person-days in unvaccinated vs 3·1 per 100 000 person-days in fully vaccinated individuals) against SARS-CoV-2 infection, 91·5% (90·7–92·2; 40·9 vs 1·8 per 100 000 person-days) against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, 97·0% (96·7–97·2; 32·5 vs 0·8 per 100 000 person-days) against symptomatic COVID-19, 97·2% (96·8–97·5; 4·6 vs 0·3 per 100 000 person-days) against COVID-19-related hospitalisation, 97·5% (97·1–97·8; 2·7 vs 0·2 per 100 000 person-days) against severe or critical COVID-19-related hospitalisation, and 96·7% (96·0–97·3; 0·6 vs 0·1 per 100 000 person-days) against COVID-19-related death. In all age groups, as vaccine coverage increased, the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 outcomes declined. 8006 of 8472 samples tested showed a spike gene target failure, giving an estimated prevalence of the B.1.1.7 variant of 94·5% among SARS-CoV-2 infections. Interpretation Two doses of BNT162b2 are highly effective across all age groups (≥16 years, including older adults aged ≥85 years) in preventing symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19-related hospitalisations, severe disease, and death, including those caused by the B.1.1.7 SARS-CoV-2 variant. There were marked and sustained declines in SARS-CoV-2 incidence corresponding to increasing vaccine coverage. These findings suggest that COVID-19 vaccination can help to control the pandemic. Funding None.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA

            Widespread acceptance of a vaccine for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) will be the next major step in fighting the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but achieving high uptake will be a challenge and may be impeded by online misinformation. To inform successful vaccination campaigns, we conducted a randomized controlled trial in the UK and the USA to quantify how exposure to online misinformation around COVID-19 vaccines affects intent to vaccinate to protect oneself or others. Here we show that in both countries-as of September 2020-fewer people would 'definitely' take a vaccine than is likely required for herd immunity, and that, relative to factual information, recent misinformation induced a decline in intent of 6.2 percentage points (95th percentile interval 3.9 to 8.5) in the UK and 6.4 percentage points (95th percentile interval 4.0 to 8.8) in the USA among those who stated that they would definitely accept a vaccine. We also find that some sociodemographic groups are differentially impacted by exposure to misinformation. Finally, we show that scientific-sounding misinformation is more strongly associated with declines in vaccination intent.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing - original draftRole: Writing - review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing - original draftRole: Writing - review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing - original draftRole: Writing - review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing - original draftRole: Writing - review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing - original draftRole: Writing - review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing - original draftRole: Writing - review & editing
                Journal
                Science
                Science
                science
                Science (New York, N.y.)
                American Association for the Advancement of Science
                0036-8075
                1095-9203
                07 October 2021
                12 November 2021
                : 374
                : 6569
                : 879-882
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Economics, Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI), University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
                [2 ]Unisanté, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
                [3 ]Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
                [4 ]Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
                [5 ]Columbia Business School, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
                [6 ]Booth School of Business, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
                [7 ]National Bureau of Economic Research, Boston, MA, USA.
                [8 ]Department of Economics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
                [9 ]Department of Finance and Economics, Hanken School of Economics, Helsinki, Finland.
                [10 ]Knut Wicksell Centre for Financial Studies, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
                Author notes
                [†]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7396-6514
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7977-8875
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8406-2756
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6726-9731
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6567-9654
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1414-9055
                Article
                abm0475
                10.1126/science.abm0475
                10765478
                34618594
                fe5b3970-2cb7-4d2f-8ee9-57c1da36f54c
                Copyright © 2021 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC BY).

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 22 August 2021
                : 01 October 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100007618, University of Chicago Booth School of Business;
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001732, Danish National Research Foundation;
                Award ID: DNRF134
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001711, Swiss National Science Foundation;
                Award ID: PZ00P1_201956
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001711, Swiss National Science Foundation;
                Award ID: 100018_185176
                Funded by: Chazen Institute for Global Business at Columbia Business School;
                Funded by: Columbia Business School;
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100004472, Riksbankens Jubileumsfond;
                Categories
                Report
                Reports
                Reports
                Economics
                Coronavirus
                Custom metadata
                3
                3

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article