Literature DB >> 34060686

Mandatory vaccination support and intentions to get vaccinated for COVID-19: Results from a nationally representative general population survey in October 2020 in Greece.

Theodoros V Giannouchos1,2, Evaggelia Steletou3, Maria Saridi4, Kyriakos Souliotis4,5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To explore rates and factors associated with mandatory vaccination support overall and intentions to get vaccinated specifically for COVID-19 among individuals in Greece.
METHODS: Using data from a nationally representative cross-sectional survey conducted in October 2020 among 855 adults (≥18 years) in Greece, we estimated support rates for mandatory vaccination and respondents' intention to get vaccinated for COVID-19 as well as associations thereof with individual sociodemographic, clinical and contextual characteristics.
RESULTS: About 74% of respondents supported mandatory vaccination and 62% intended to get vaccinated for COVID-19. The most prevalent reasons against COVID-19 vaccination were safety concerns related to the duration of clinical trials and potential side effects. Individuals who reported increased trust in healthcare authorities' recommendations, who revealed that their trust in the State increased due to the way the COVID-19 pandemic was handled, who used preventive services more often, and those with higher income were more likely to both support mandatory vaccination and to indicate intention to get vaccinated for COVID-19. Participants with worse or better self-reported health status (compared to average), younger adults, and females were less likely to intend to get vaccinated for COVID-19.
CONCLUSION: The survey revealed that the majority of the Greek citizens favour mandatory vaccination overall and intend to get vaccinated for COVID-19, driven mostly by utilization of preventive services and trust in healthcare authorities. However, intention to get vaccinated for COVID-19 was lower relative to mandatory vaccination support. This suggests a need to intensify evidence-based yet simplified messaging by esteemed healthcare providers to inform the public on the risks and benefits of vaccines.
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; hesitancy; patient preferences; prevention; public health; vaccination

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34060686      PMCID: PMC8242429          DOI: 10.1111/jep.13588

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract        ISSN: 1356-1294            Impact factor:   2.336


INTRODUCTION

As vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) that causes COVID‐19 become available to the majority of the population and vaccination rates increase globally in an attempt to achieve herd immunity, heated discussions spread among healthcare professionals, bioethicists, and legal entities regarding the potential to mandate vaccination. , , A legal mandate to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 coupled with coercive actions for individuals who opt‐out of vaccination might be restrictive to individuals' rights, liberty, and autonomy and not ethically justifiable. On the other hand, the growing evidence on safety and effectiveness of available vaccines, their wide availability, affordability, and accessibility minimize the burden of a potential mandate while providing increased societal welfare and utility gains by protecting both vaccinated individuals and mitigating person‐to‐person transmission. The decision to pursue a vaccine for the virus is not merely dependent on vaccine efficacy and safety but also driven by individuals' preferences, knowledge, attitudes, and characteristics. Recent estimates suggest a wide variation across multiple countries in both public support for mandatory vaccination and COVID‐19 vaccination intentions and acceptance. The consensus around COVID‐19 vaccination intentions is currently between 50% to 70% in most countries, which is not sufficient to achieve herd immunity, thus raising concerns among stakeholders. , , , , Although, globally, well‐established vaccines against many preventable diseases are widely accepted and their health, economic, and societal benefits recognized, concerns related to the fast approval processes of COVID‐19 vaccines, coupled with limited multi‐year data on their real‐world effectiveness, are commonly cited reasons for hesitant attitudes towards novel COVID‐19 vaccines. , , , , , , Certain sociodemographic subgroups, in particular females, younger adults, those with lower educational level and income, and with negative views of vaccination in general, have also been found to be less likely to pursue COVID‐19 immunization. , , In Greece, support for mandatory vaccination in the pre‐pandemic period ranged from 65% to 97%. , , Evidence from the first phase of the pandemic revealed that around 58% of the general population intended to get vaccinated for COVID‐19, with higher rates observed for older adults, vulnerable populations, and those with more accurate knowledge regarding severity, symptoms, transmission, and prevention against the virus. Among healthcare professionals, reported rates were 79%, mostly driven by absence of fear regarding vaccine safety and reliable information from healthcare authorities. However, there is lack of evidence on how mandatory vaccination support has evolved during the ongoing pandemic. In this study, we leverage data from a larger‐scale project on preferences for healthcare policy reforms collected in October 2020 to explore rates and factors associated with support for mandatory vaccination overall and intention to get vaccinated specifically for COVID‐19 among individuals in Greece. We further present evidence on the reasons to refuse COVID‐19 vaccination. Our findings might inform and enable stakeholders to tailor healthcare policy interventions to certain subgroups of the population, to promote immunization uptake, while providing the framework for a potential mandate for vaccination.

METHODS

We used data from a nationally representative, cross‐sectional telephone survey conducted in October 2020 in Greece to obtain information on attitudes towards mandatory vaccination and intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 among 1012 adult (18 years of age or older) Greek residents. More details about the survey and data collection process are described elsewhere. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Peloponnese.

Study variables

The two outcomes of interest were whether individuals supported mandatory vaccination or not and their intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19, both defined as dichotomous (0 = No, 1 = Yes). Among those who refused to get vaccinated for COVID‐19, we further obtained information on the reasons related to this unwillingness, namely “I think the clinical trials were too short and I do not feel safe”, “Scared of side effects”, “Vaccination serves other purposes”, “Believe it's not effective”, or “Not sure/Do not wish to answer”. Similar to previous work, we used multiple independent variables to estimate their association with the outcome variables of interest, which are described in detail in previous work. These included: (a) sociodemographic and contextual characteristics, (b) health‐related characteristics, (c) utilization of preventive healthcare services, and (d) information regarding trust and satisfaction with the healthcare system and how trust in the State was affected (increased, remained the same, decreased) by the way the COVID‐19 pandemic was managed.

Statistical analysis

Descriptive analyses were conducted to describe overall study participants, who were further stratified by their responses on the two outcomes of interest. We tested for statistical differences in the stratified mandatory vaccination and intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 preferences using Pearson χ2 test. We then used two multivariable logistic regressions to estimate associations between respondents' characteristics, their attitudes towards and utilization patterns of the healthcare system, and their preferences on the two outcomes of interest separately. SEs were clustered at the geographical region of residence. We used geographic‐level fixed effects to control for unobserved regional characteristics. All statistical analyses were conducted using Stata (version 16.1; StataCorp, College Station, TX).

RESULTS

Overall, 855 individuals fully completed the survey (response rate: 84.5% ‐ 95 individuals did not respond to the COVID‐19 vaccine question; 62 individuals did not fully complete the questionnaire). Characteristics and responses of all respondents are presented in Table 1 (Table 1). About 74% supported mandatory vaccination and 62% intended to get vaccinated for COVID‐19. About half reported a decrease in their trust in the State attributed to the way the COVID‐19 pandemic was managed. Higher rates of both mandatory vaccination support and willingness to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 were observed among those who reported increased trust in the State both due to the way the COVID‐19 pandemic was handled and in general.
TABLE 1

Descriptive characteristics and information of respondents overall and stratified by mandatory vaccination support and intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19

Mandatory vaccination supportCovid‐19 vaccination intention
All (n = 855)No (n = 220)Yes (n = 635) P‐valueNo (n = 326)Yes (n = 529) P‐value
%25.774.338.161.9
Gender (%).024.050
Male422 (49.4)123 (55.9)299 (47.1)147 (45.1)275 (52.0)
Female433 (50.6)97 (44.1)336 (52.9)179 (54.9)254 (48.0)
Age groups (%).335<.001
18 to 39254 (29.7)62 (28.2)192 (30.2)119 (36.5)135 (25.5)
40 to 54234 (27.4)70 (31.8)164 (25.8)86 (26.4)148 (28.0)
55 to 64193 (22.6)49 (22.3)144 (22.7)75 (23.0)118 (22.3)
≥65174 (20.3)39 (17.7)135 (21.3)46 (14.1)128 (24.2)
Education (%).001.001
Elementary33 (3.9)11 (5.0)22 (3.5)13 (4.0)20 (3.8)
High School259 (30.3)86 (39.1)173 (27.2)112 (34.4)147 (27.8)
University361 (42.2)89 (40.5)272 (42.8)148 (45.4)213 (40.3)
MSc/PhD202 (23.6)34 (15.4)168 (26.5)53 (16.2)149 (28.2)
Occupation (%).116.023
Full‐time464 (54.3)122 (55.5)342 (53.9)175 (53.7)289 (54.6)
Retired225 (26.3)86 (25.4)169 (26.6)75 (23.0)150 (28.4)
Other (student/housewife)82 (9.6)14 (6.4)68 (10.7)32 (9.8)50 (9.4)
Unemployed84 (9.8)28 (12.7)56 (8.8)44 (13.5)40 (7.6)
Underage children living in the household (%).023.038
No679 (79.4)163 (74.1)516 (81.3)247 (75.8)432 (81.7)
Yes176 (20.6)57 (25.9)119 (18.7)79 (24.2)97 (18.3)
Chronic conditions (at least one) (%)<.001.006
No463 (54.2)142 (64.6)321 (50.6)196 (60.1)267 (50.5)
Yes392 (45.8)78 (35.4)314 (49.4)130 (39.9)262 (49.5)
Rural residence (%).201.684
No737 (86.2)184 (83.6)553 (87.1)283 (86.8)454 (85.8)
Yes118 (13.8)36 (16.4)82 (12.9)43 (13.2)75 (14.2)
Self‐reported income (%)<.001<.001
Very low239 (28.0)79 (35.9)160 (25.2)119 (36.5)120 (22.7)
Low to average218 (25.5)64 (29.1)154 (24.2)87 (26.7)131 (24.8)
Average313 (36.6)65 (29.6)248 (39.1)100 (30.7)213 (40.3)
Higher than average85 (9.9)12 (5.4)73 (11.5)20 (6.1)65 (12.3)
Uninsured (%).413.108
No799 (93.4)203 (92.3)596 (93.9)299 (91.7)500 (94.5)
Yes56 (6.6)17 (7.7)39 (6.1)27 (8.3)29 (5.5)
Do you have private insurance coverage? (%).558.082
No696 (81.4)182 (82.7)514 (80.9)275 (84.4)421 (79.6)
Yes159 (18.6)38 (17.3)121 (19.1)51 (15.6)108 (20.4)
Self‐reported health status (%).024<.001
Average147 (17.2)26 (11.8)121 (19.1)38 (11.7)109 (20.6)
Bad/very bad48 (5.6)14 (6.4)34 (5.4)24 (7.4)24 (4.5)
Good432 (50.5)108 (49.1)324 (51.0)157 (48.2)275 (52.0)
Very good228 (26.7)72 (32.7)156 (24.6)107 (32.8)121 (22.9)
Trust in official healthcare authorities' guidelines and recommendations on healthcare issues (ie vaccination) (%)<.001<.001
No trust127 (14.9)67 (30.6)60 (9.5)92 (28.3)35 (6.6)
Somewhat242 (28.4)73 (33.3)169 (26.7)114 (35.1)128 (24.3)
Quite314 (36.9)58 (26.5)256 (40.4)95 (29.2)219 (41.6)
A lot169 (19.8)21 (9.6)148 (23.4)24 (7.4)145 (27.5)
How often do you use healthcare preventive services (ie checkup)? (%).007.042
Never/Rarely235 (27.5)77 (35.0)158 (24.9)107 (32.8)128 (24.2)
Sometimes289 (33.8)77 (35.0)212 (33.4)107 (32.8)182 (34.4)
Often292 (34.1)57 (25.9)235 (37.0)99 (30.4)193 (36.5)
Very often39 (4.6)9 (4.1)30 (4.7)13 (4.0)26 (4.9)
How satisfied are you with the healthcare system? (%)<.001<.001
Not at all252 (29.5)90 (40.9)162 (25.5)133 (40.8)119 (22.5)
Somewhat345 (40.4)74 (33.6)271 (42.7)134 (41.1)211 (39.9)
Quite/Very satisfied258 (30.1)56 (25.5)202 (31.8)59 (18.1)199 (37.6)
How did your trust in the State and the authorities (ie healthcare system) change from the way the COVID‐19 pandemic was dealt with? (%)<.001<.001
No change247 (28.9)57 (25.9)190 (29.9)82 (25.1)165 (31.2)
Increased176 (20.6)19 (8.6)157 (24.7)30 (9.2)146 (27.6)
Decreased432 (50.5)144 (65.5)288 (45.4)214 (65.7)218 (41.2)
Descriptive characteristics and information of respondents overall and stratified by mandatory vaccination support and intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 Among those who supported mandatory vaccination, 75% also reported an intention to accept COVID‐19 vaccination (Table 2). Interestingly, one‐quarter did not intend to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 despite their support for a vaccination mandate, while a similar share (24.1%) intended to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 despite not supporting mandatory vaccination. Among the 38% of participants who did not intend to get vaccinated for COVID‐19, the two primary reasons included safety concerns related to the duration of the clinical trials (60%) and potential side‐effects (26%) (Table 3). However, we observed differences in the reasons related to unwillingness to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 based on general support for mandatory vaccination, with conspiracy attitudes (“Vaccination serves other purposes”) and effectiveness questioning being more prevalent among those who did not support mandatory vaccination either. In contrast, more than 90% of individuals who supported mandatory vaccination but did not intend to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 reported safety concerns as the primary reason for their decision.
TABLE 2

Mandatory vaccination support and intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19

Mandatory vaccination support
No (n = 220)Yes (n = 635) P‐value
Covid‐19 vaccination intention <.001
No (n = 326) 167 (75.9)159 (25.0)
Yes (n = 529) 53 (24.1)476 (75.0)
TABLE 3

Primary reasons against COVID‐19 vaccination overall and stratified by mandatory vaccination support

All (n = 326)Against mandatory vaccination (n = 167)Mandatory vaccination support (n = 159) P‐value
Reasons for not willing to vaccinate against COVID‐19 (%) <.001
I think the clinical trials were too short and I do not feel safe194 (59.5)86 (51.5)108 (67.9)
Scared of side effects84 (25.8)45 (27.0)39 (24.5)
Vaccination serves other purposes19 (5.8)16 (9.6)3 (1.9)
Believe it's not effective18 (5.5)16 (9.6)2 (1.3)
Not sure/Do not wish to answer11 (3.4)4 (2.4)7 (4.4)
Mandatory vaccination support and intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 Primary reasons against COVID‐19 vaccination overall and stratified by mandatory vaccination support In the multivariable analyses, increased trust in the State and healthcare authorities during the pandemic and in general, frequent use of preventive services, higher than average incomes, and post‐graduate educational level (compared to elementary) were associated with support towards mandatory vaccination and intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 (although education was not statistically significant at the P < .05 level) (Table 4). In contrast, worse or better than average health status was inversely associated with support towards mandatory vaccination and intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19. Individuals who were more satisfied with the healthcare system in general and older adults, particularly those who were 65 years of age or older compared to those who were 18 to 39, were more likely to get vaccinated for COVID‐19, while females were less likely compared to males.
TABLE 4

Multivariable logistic regressions for mandatory vaccination support and intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19

Mandatory vaccination supportCovid‐19 vaccination intention
OR95% CI P‐valueOR95% CI P‐value
How did your trust in the State and the authorities (ie, healthcare system) change from the way the COVID‐19 pandemic was dealt with? (Ref: No change)
Increased2.321.54‐3.50<.0011.791.32‐2.42<.001
Decreased1.160.80‐1.70.4340.950.64‐1.41.814
Trust in official healthcare authorities' guidelines and recommendations on healthcare issues (ie vaccination) (Ref: No trust)
Somewhat2.161.10‐4.23.0262.591.78‐3.75<.001
Quite4.452.25‐8.81<.0014.412.56‐7.58<.001
A lot6.193.17‐12.08<.0018.624.56‐16.31<.001
How often do you use healthcare preventive services (ie checkup)? (Ref: Never/Rarely)
Sometimes1.030.69‐1.55.8691.220.66‐2.28.526
Often1.941.41‐2.68<.0011.600.90‐2.82.106
Very often1.620.96‐2.72.0682.151.05‐4.40.037
How satisfied are you with the healthcare system? (Ref: Not at all)
Somewhat1.290.85‐1.98.2351.090.74‐1.60.669
Quite/very satisfied0.800.46‐1.40.4381.521.10‐2.09.010
Self‐reported health status (Ref: Average)
Bad/very bad0.540.22‐1.29.1640.360.17‐0.78.010
Good0.600.23‐1.55.2900.490.34‐0.69<.001
Very good0.410.21‐0.80.0090.260.17‐0.42<.001
Age‐groups (Ref: 18 to 39)
40 to 540.600.35‐1.03.0641.370.95‐1.98.089
55 to 640.860.39‐1.94.7221.440.82‐2.52.200
≥650.740.36‐1.50.4012.411.16‐5.02.018
Self‐reported income (Ref: Very low)
Low to average0.820.56‐1.21.3221.080.74‐1.57.699
Average1.160.69‐1.94.5831.210.74‐1.98.445
Higher than average2.441.07‐5.61.0352.161.37‐3.41.001
Gender (Ref: Male)
Female1.410.97‐2.04.0720.610.44‐0.84.002
Chronic conditions (at least one) (Ref: No)
Yes1.561.01‐2.39.0430.930.76‐1.13.445
Occupation (Ref: Full‐time)
Retired0.770.60‐0.97.0280.610.31‐1.21.159
Other (student, housewife)1.680.78‐3.61.1871.050.41‐2.68.925
Unemployed0.650.39‐1.08.0980.670.34‐1.32.252
Education (Ref: Elementary)
High School0.900.37‐2.22.8270.790.45‐1.38.410
University1.440.59‐3.48.4230.860.45‐1.64.647
MSc/PhD2.420.62‐9.46.2051.740.90‐3.35.100
Underage children living in the household (Ref: No)
Yes0.660.38‐1.15.1440.690.45‐1.08.103
Rural residence (Ref: No)
Yes0.710.31‐1.60.4051.020.58‐1.78.951
Uninsured (Ref: No)
Yes1.300.76‐2.23.3331.340.93‐1.93.122
Do you have private insurance coverage? (Ref: No)
Yes0.660.49‐0.90.0090.920.67‐1.26.590

Note: The regression models control for geographic‐level fixed effects.

Abbreviations: CI, Confidence intervals; OR, adjusted odds ratio; Ref, Reference.

Multivariable logistic regressions for mandatory vaccination support and intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 Note: The regression models control for geographic‐level fixed effects. Abbreviations: CI, Confidence intervals; OR, adjusted odds ratio; Ref, Reference.

DISCUSSION

Our results suggest that about 74% of respondents supported mandatory vaccination overall, a relative decline of 13% compared to estimates from the same survey in 2019. This finding could be related both to the observed decline in trust in healthcare authorities and the State during the pandemic as well as the uncertainty and widespread misinformation of vaccine efficacy during the past year. We also found that 62% of participants intended to get vaccinated for COVID‐19, a result consistent with global and country‐specific estimates. , , , , Interestingly, this share is higher compared to a survey conducted during the same period among healthcare professionals in Greece, which indicated that 51.1% of healthcare personnel intended to get vaccinated for COVID‐19. This could be related to the baseline heterogeneity between the populations analyzed. Healthcare professionals were disproportionately younger and females in the study by Maltezou and colleagues compared to our study of the general population in Greece (<40 years old: 40.5% vs 29.7%; females: 65.0% vs 50.6%), and both younger age and female gender were inversely associated with the intention to get vaccinated for COVID‐19. Despite, both in our study and the study among healthcare professionals in Greece, the primary reasons for refusing COVID‐19 vaccination were similar and mostly related to vaccine safety and information availability. Furthermore, our analyses revealed that certain subgroups of the population are less likely to intend to get vaccinated for COVID‐19, particularly younger adults, females, lower‐income populations, and those with worse or better than average self‐reported health status. These findings are not surprising, since younger and healthier individuals might feel invincible to the virus, those with worse health status might be more concerned about increased susceptibility to vaccine‐related side effects, while gender‐related differences might be attributed to males being predominantly hard‐hit by COVID‐19, and to initial uncertainty about vaccination for pregnant and reproductive‐age females. , , Beyond these characteristics, common factors associated with both mandatory vaccination support and intentions to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 included increased trust in the State and healthcare authorities and more frequent use of preventive services. These findings are in line with growing studies on the topic, particularly those related to the positive effect of evolving knowledge and attitudes about vaccines during the pandemic towards vaccination support, thus highlighting the need to tailor more aggressive communication efforts regarding the benefits and risks of vaccination to specific subgroups of the population. , , , , Our data indicate that effective community outreach initiatives have the potential to increase COVID‐19 vaccination uptake by almost 20% since 159 respondents supported mandatory vaccination but did not intend to get vaccinated for COVID‐19 due to safety concerns. Effective, evidence‐based messaging in plain language by trustworthy providers has the potential to convince a large proportion of the population to accept COVID‐19 vaccination, and, in turn, increase vaccination uptake rate to more than 80%, sufficient to achieve herd immunity.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Theodoros V. Giannouchos: Conducted data and statistical analyses and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. Kyriakos Souliotis: Conceived, designed and scientifically led the study and coordinated study data collection. Evaggelia Steletou, Maria Saridi, Kyriakos Souliotis: Critically reviewed the manuscript for important intellectual content and contributed to the editing and writing of the final manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
  21 in total

1.  Evaluating the effectiveness of national measles elimination action in mainland China during 2004-2016: A multi-site interrupted time-series study.

Authors:  Lijun Xu; Jun Chen; Zhiying Zhan; Tingting Chen; Wenhui Liu; Jun Qian; Chunquan Ou
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 3.641

2.  Vaccine mandates, value pluralism, and policy diversity.

Authors:  Mark C Navin; Katie Attwell
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2019-08-06       Impact factor: 1.898

3.  Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in the US.

Authors:  Amyn A Malik; SarahAnn M McFadden; Jad Elharake; Saad B Omer
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2020-08-12

4.  Vaccination of healthcare personnel in Europe: Update to current policies.

Authors:  Helena C Maltezou; Elisabeth Botelho-Nevers; Arne B Brantsæter; Rose-Marie Carlsson; Ulrich Heininger; Judith M Hübschen; Kamilla S Josefsdottir; George Kassianos; Jan Kyncl; Caterina Ledda; Snežana Medić; Aneta Nitsch-Osuch; Raul Ortiz de Lejarazu; Maria Theodoridou; Pierre Van Damme; Gerrit A van Essen; Sabine Wicker; Ursula Wiedermann; Gregory A Poland
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2019-10-14       Impact factor: 3.641

5.  Risk Factors for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Hospitalization: COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

Authors:  Jean Y Ko; Melissa L Danielson; Machell Town; Gordana Derado; Kurt J Greenlund; Pam Daily Kirley; Nisha B Alden; Kimberly Yousey-Hindes; Evan J Anderson; Patricia A Ryan; Sue Kim; Ruth Lynfield; Salina M Torres; Grant R Barney; Nancy M Bennett; Melissa Sutton; H Keipp Talbot; Mary Hill; Aron J Hall; Alicia M Fry; Shikha Garg; Lindsay Kim
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 9.079

6.  Editor's Choice: Influenza vaccine uptake, COVID-19 vaccination intention and vaccine hesitancy among nurses: A survey.

Authors:  Kin On Kwok; Kin-Kit Li; Wan In Wei; Arthur Tang; Samuel Yeung Shan Wong; Shui Shan Lee
Journal:  Int J Nurs Stud       Date:  2020-12-05       Impact factor: 5.837

7.  COVID-19 Vaccine: Promoting Vaccine Acceptance.

Authors:  Christine Laine; Deborah Cotton; Darilyn V Moyer
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2020-12-21       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 8.  COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Worldwide: A Concise Systematic Review of Vaccine Acceptance Rates.

Authors:  Malik Sallam
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-16

9.  Characteristics and risk factors for COVID-19 diagnosis and adverse outcomes in Mexico: an analysis of 89,756 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases.

Authors:  Theodoros V Giannouchos; Roberto A Sussman; José M Mier; Konstantinos Poulas; Konstantinos Farsalinos
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 16.671

10.  Interim Estimates of Vaccine Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 Vaccines in Preventing SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Health Care Personnel, First Responders, and Other Essential and Frontline Workers - Eight U.S. Locations, December 2020-March 2021.

Authors:  Mark G Thompson; Jefferey L Burgess; Allison L Naleway; Harmony L Tyner; Sarang K Yoon; Jennifer Meece; Lauren E W Olsho; Alberto J Caban-Martinez; Ashley Fowlkes; Karen Lutrick; Jennifer L Kuntz; Kayan Dunnigan; Marilyn J Odean; Kurt T Hegmann; Elisha Stefanski; Laura J Edwards; Natasha Schaefer-Solle; Lauren Grant; Katherine Ellingson; Holly C Groom; Tnelda Zunie; Matthew S Thiese; Lynn Ivacic; Meredith G Wesley; Julie Mayo Lamberte; Xiaoxiao Sun; Michael E Smith; Andrew L Phillips; Kimberly D Groover; Young M Yoo; Joe Gerald; Rachel T Brown; Meghan K Herring; Gregory Joseph; Shawn Beitel; Tyler C Morrill; Josephine Mak; Patrick Rivers; Katherine M Harris; Danielle R Hunt; Melissa L Arvay; Preeta Kutty; Alicia M Fry; Manjusha Gaglani
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2021-04-02       Impact factor: 17.586

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Acceptance towards COVID-19 vaccination in Latin America and the Caribbean: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Esteban A Alarcón-Braga; Enrique A Hernandez-Bustamante; Farley E Salazar-Valdivia; Valeria A Valdez-Cornejo; Melany D Mosquera-Rojas; Juan R Ulloque-Badaracco; Jenny C Rondon-Saldaña; Jessica H Zafra-Tanaka
Journal:  Travel Med Infect Dis       Date:  2022-06-06       Impact factor: 20.441

2.  Attitudes Toward Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination in Germany.

Authors:  Thomas Rieger; Christoph Schmidt-Petri; Carsten Schröder
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2022-05-13       Impact factor: 8.251

3.  Assessment of public intention to get vaccination against COVID-19: Evidence from a developing country.

Authors:  Muhammad Irfan; Abdul Latif Shahid; Munir Ahmad; Wasim Iqbal; Rajvikram Madurai Elavarasan; Siyu Ren; Abid Hussain
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 2.336

4.  Public opinion on a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy in France: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Amandine Gagneux-Brunon; Elisabeth Botelho-Nevers; Marion Bonneton; Patrick Peretti-Watel; Pierre Verger; Odile Launay; Jeremy K Ward
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2021-11-10       Impact factor: 8.067

5.  The Effect of Message Framing on COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions among the Younger Age Population Groups: Results from an Experimental Study in the Italian Context.

Authors:  Sara Betta; Greta Castellini; Marta Acampora; Serena Barello
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-04

6.  Mandatory Vaccination Against COVID-19: Twitter Poll Analysis on Public Health Opinion.

Authors:  Valentin Ritschl; Fabian Eibensteiner; Erika Mosor; Maisa Omara; Lisa Sperl; Faisal A Nawaz; Chandragiri Siva Sai; Merisa Cenanovic; Hari Prasad Devkota; Mojca Hribersek; Ronita De; Elisabeth Klager; Eva Schaden; Maria Kletecka-Pulker; Sabine Völkl-Kernstock; Harald Willschke; Christoph Aufricht; Atanas G Atanasov; Tanja Stamm
Journal:  JMIR Form Res       Date:  2022-06-21

7.  Parental attitudes towards vaccination against COVID-19 of children 5-11 years old in Greece.

Authors:  Konstantinos Miliordos; Theodoros Giannouchos; Evangelia Steletou; Georgios Sanidas; Aglaia Karkania; Aggeliki Vervenioti; Gabriel Dimitriou; Despoina Gkentzi
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2022-05-23       Impact factor: 2.336

8.  Mandatory vaccination support and intentions to get vaccinated for COVID-19: Results from a nationally representative general population survey in October 2020 in Greece.

Authors:  Theodoros V Giannouchos; Evaggelia Steletou; Maria Saridi; Kyriakos Souliotis
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 2.336

9.  Social Response to the Vaccine against COVID-19: The Underrated Power of Influence.

Authors:  Dimitra S Mouliou; Ioannis Pantazopoulos; Konstantinos I Gourgoulianis
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2021-12-29

10.  Attitudes and Determinants of Mandatory Vaccination against COVID-19 among the General Population of Cyprus: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Konstantinos Giannakou; Maria Kyprianidou; Alexandros Heraclides
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.