The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Factors Associated With US Adults’ Likelihood of Accepting COVID-19 Vaccination
Open accessAbstract
Importance: The development of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine has progressed at unprecedented speed. Widespread public uptake of the vaccine is crucial to stem the pandemic. Objective: To examine the factors associated with survey participants' self-reported likelihood of selecting and receiving a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: A survey study of a nonprobability convenience sample of 2000 recruited participants including a choice-based conjoint analysis was conducted to estimate respondents' probability of choosing a vaccine and willingness to receive vaccination. Participants were asked to evaluate their willingness to receive each hypothetical vaccine individually. The survey presented respondents with 5 choice tasks. In each, participants evaluated 2 hypothetical COVID-19 vaccines and were asked whether they would choose vaccine A, vaccine B, or neither vaccine. Vaccine attributes included efficacy, protection duration, major adverse effects, minor adverse effects, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process, national origin of vaccine, and endorsement. Levels of each attribute for each vaccine were randomly assigned, and attribute order was randomized across participants. Survey data were collected on July 9, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Average marginal component effect sizes and marginal means were calculated to estimate the relationship between each vaccine attribute level and the probability of the respondent choosing a vaccine and self-reported willingness to receive vaccination. Results: A total of 1971 US adults responded to the survey (median age, 43 [interquartile range, 30-58] years); 999 (51%) were women, 1432 (73%) White, 277 (14%) were Black, and 190 (10%) were Latinx. An increase in efficacy from 50% to 70% was associated with a higher probability of choosing a vaccine (coefficient, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.06-0.09), and an increase from 50% to 90% was associated with a higher probability of choosing a vaccine (coefficient, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.15-0.18). An increase in protection duration from 1 to 5 years was associated with a higher probability of choosing a vaccine (coefficient, 0.05 95% CI, 0.04-0.07). A decrease in the incidence of major adverse effects from 1 in 10 000 to 1 in 1 000 000 was associated with a higher probability of choosing a vaccine (coefficient, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.05-0.08). An FDA emergency use authorization was associated with a lower probability of choosing a vaccine (coefficient, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.04 to -0.01) compared with full FDA approval. A vaccine that originated from a non-US country was associated with a lower probability of choosing a vaccine (China: -0.13 [95% CI, -0.15 to -0.11]; UK: -0.04 [95% CI, -0.06 to -0.02]). Endorsements from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (coefficient, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.07-0.11) and the World Health Organization (coefficient, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.04-0.08), compared with an endorsement from President Trump were associated with higher probabilities of choosing a vaccine. Analyses of participants' willingness to receive each vaccine when assessed individually yielded similar results. An increase in efficacy from 50% to 90% was associated with a 10% higher marginal mean willingness to receive a vaccine (from 0.51 to 0.61). A reduction in the incidence of major side effects was associated with a 4% higher marginal mean willingness to receive a vaccine (from 0.54 to 0.58). A vaccine originating in China was associated with a 10% lower willingness to receive a vaccine vs one developed in the US (from 0.60 to 0.50) Endorsements from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and World Health Organization were associated with increases in willingness to receive a vaccine (7% and 6%, respectively) from a baseline endorsement by President Trump (from 0.52 to 0.59 and from 0.52 to 0.58, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of US adults, vaccine-related attributes and political characteristics were associated with self-reported preferences for choosing a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine and self-reported willingness to receive vaccination. These results may help inform public health campaigns to address vaccine hesitancy when a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D. J., & Yamamoto, T. (2014) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpt024 · Cited by 1,990 · cited 1×
“Educational attainment Less than high school 34 (2) High school/GED 410 (21) Some college 583 (30) 4-y College degree 469 (24) Graduate school 475 (24)”
BackgroundThe State of Vaccine Confidence 2016: Global Insights Through a 67-Country Survey
Larson, H. J., de Figueiredo, A., Xiahong, Z., Schulz, W. S., Verger, P., Johnston, I. G., Cook, A. R., & Jones, N. S. (2016) · EBioMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.08.042 · Cited by 1,264
Coppock, A., & McClellan, O. A. (2019) · Research & Politics · doi:10.1177/2053168018822174 · Cited by 987
Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: a Practical Guide
de Bekker-Grob, E. W., Donkers, B., Jonker, M. F., & Stolk, E. A. (2015) · The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research · doi:10.1007/s40271-015-0118-z · Cited by 925
Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments
Leeper, T. J., Hobolt, S. B., & Tilley, J. (2020) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1017/pan.2019.30 · Cited by 846
Rapid COVID-19 vaccine development
Graham, B. S. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abb8923 · Cited by 771
Commercial Use of Conjoint Analysis: A Survey
Cattin, P., & Wittink, D. R. (1982) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298204600308 · Cited by 692
Summary Report of the AAPOR Task Force on Non-probability Sampling
Baker, R., Brick, J. M., Bates, N. A., Battaglia, M., Couper, M. P., Dever, J. A., Gile, K. J., & Tourangeau, R. (2013) · Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology · doi:10.1093/jssam/smt008 · Cited by 652
Research synthesis: AAPOR report on online panels
Prepared for the AAPOR Executive Council by a Task Force operating under the auspices of the AAPOR Standards Committee, W. M. I., Baker, R., Blumberg, S. J., Brick, J. M., Couper, M. P., Courtright, M., Dennis, J. M., Dillman, D., Frankel, M. R., Garland, P., et al. (2010) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfq048 · Cited by 584
Quaife, M., Terris-Prestholt, F., Di Tanna, G. L., & Vickerman, P. (2018) · The European Journal of Health Economics · doi:10.1007/s10198-018-0954-6 · Cited by 371
Cited by
A global database of COVID-19 vaccinations
Mathieu, E., Ritchie, H., Ortiz-Ospina, E., Roser, M., Hasell, J., Appel, C., Giattino, C., & Rodés-Guirao, L. (2021) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01122-8 · Cited by 1,974
COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in low- and middle-income countries
(2021) · doi:10.1038/s41591-021-01454-y · Cited by 1,105
Behavioural nudges increase COVID-19 vaccinations
Dai, H., Saccardo, S., Han, M. A., Roh, L., Raja, N., Vangala, S., Modi, H., Pandya, S., Sloyan, M., & Croymans, D. M. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03843-2 · Cited by 462
Cascini, F., Pantovic, A., Al-Ajlouni, Y., Failla, G., & Ricciardi, W. (2021) · EClinicalMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101113 · Cited by 396
Trust in a COVID-19 vaccine in the U.S.: A social-ecological perspective
Latkin, C. A., Dayton, L., Yi, G., Konstantopoulos, A., & Boodram, B. (2021) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113684 · Cited by 386
Metadata
- Authors
- Kreps, S., Prasad, S., Brownstein, J. S., Hswen, Y., Garibaldi, B. T., Zhang, B., & Kriner, D. L.
- Venue
- JAMA Network Open
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2020-10-20
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- e2025594
- ISSN
- 2574-3805 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3092748982
- Cited by
- 732
- References
- 27
- FWCI
- 81.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Factors Associated With US Adults’ Likelihood of Accepting COVID-19 Vaccination. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.25594
- The paper
- Kreps, S., Prasad, S., Brownstein, J. S., Hswen, Y., Garibaldi, B. T., Zhang, B., & Kriner, D. L. (2020). Factors Associated With US Adults’ Likelihood of Accepting COVID-19 Vaccination. JAMA Network Open. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.25594
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.