The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
International estimates of intended uptake and refusal of COVID-19 vaccines: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of large nationally representative samples
Open accessAbstract
Background: Widespread uptake of COVID-19 vaccines will be essential to extinguishing the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccines have been developed in unprecedented time and hesitancy towards vaccination among the general population is unclear. Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using large nationally representative samples (n[≥]1000) to examine the percentage of the population intending to vaccinate, unsure, or intending to refuse a COVID-19 vaccine when available. Generic inverse meta-analysis and meta-regression were used to pool estimates and examine time trends. PubMed, Scopus and pre-printer servers were searched from January-November, 2020. Registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020223132). Findings: Twenty-eight nationally representative samples (n = 58,656) from 13 countries indicate that as the pandemic has progressed, the percentage of people intending to vaccinate and refuse vaccination have been decreasing and increasing respectively. Pooled data from surveys conducted during June-October suggest that 60% (95% CI: 49% to 69%) intend to vaccinate and 20% (95% CI: 13% to 29%) intend to refuse vaccination, although intentions vary substantially between samples and countries (I2 > 90%). Being female, younger, of lower income or education level and belonging to an ethnic minority group were consistently associated with being less likely to intend to vaccinate. Findings were consistent across higher vs. lower quality studies. Interpretation: Intentions to be vaccinated when a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available have been declining globally and there is an urgent need to address social inequalities in vaccine hesitancy and promote widespread uptake of vaccines as they become available. Funding: N/A
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
Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY
Williamson, E. J., Walker, A. J., Bhaskaran, K., Bacon, S., Bates, C., Morton, C. E., Curtis, H. J., Mehrkar, A., Evans, D., Inglesby, P., et al. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2521-4 · Cited by 6,674
A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine
Lazarus, J. V., Ratzan, S. C., Palayew, A., Gostin, L. O., Larson, H. J., Rabin, K., Kimball, S., & El-Mohandes, A. (2021) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-020-1124-9 · Cited by 2,904
Maringe, C., Spicer, J., Morris, M., Purushotham, A., Nolte, E., Sullivan, R., Rachet, B., & Aggarwal, A. (2020) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(20)30388-0 · Cited by 1,807
Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19 around the world
Roozenbeek, J., Schneider, C. R., Dryhurst, S., Kerr, J., Freeman, A. L. J., Recchia, G., van der Bles, A. M., & van der Linden, S. (2020) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.201199 · Cited by 1,447
Schmid, P., Rauber, D., Betsch, C., Lidolt, G., & Denker, M.-L. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0170550 · Cited by 1,228
Attitudes Toward a Potential SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine: A Survey of U.S. Adults
Fisher, K. A., Bloomstone, S. J., Walder, J., Crawford, S., Fouayzi, H., & Mazor, K. M. (2020) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m20-3569 · Cited by 1,189
Reiter, P. L., Pennell, M. L., & Katz, M. L. (2020) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.08.043 · Cited by 1,103
Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccination during the COVID-19 Pandemic in China
Wang, J., Jing, R., Lai, X., Zhang, H., Lyu, Y., Knoll, M. D., & Fang, H. (2020) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines8030482 · Cited by 971
Confidence and Receptivity for COVID-19 Vaccines: A Rapid Systematic Review
Lin, C., Tu, P., & Beitsch, L. M. (2020) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9010016 · Cited by 839
Yeager, D. S., Krosnick, J. A., Chang, L., Javitz, H. S., Levendusky, M. S., Simpser, A., & Wang, R. (2011) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfr020 · Cited by 758
Cited by
Vaccine Hesitancy: Contemporary Issues and Historical Background
Nuwarda, R. F., Ramzan, I., Weekes, L., & Kayser, V. (2022) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines10101595 · Cited by 282
Luk, T. T., Lui, J. H. T., & Wang, M. P. (2022) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/39063 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Robinson, E., Jones, A., Lesser, I., & Daly, M.
- Venue
- Vaccine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-04
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 2024-2034
- ISSN
- 0264-410X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3128584009
- Cited by
- 518
- References
- 28
- FWCI
- 13.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: International estimates of intended uptake and refusal of COVID-19 vaccines: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of large nationally representative samples. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.02.005
- The paper
- Robinson, E., Jones, A., Lesser, I., & Daly, M. (2021). International estimates of intended uptake and refusal of COVID-19 vaccines: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of large nationally representative samples. Vaccine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.02.005
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.