The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 11 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine
Open accessAbstract
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 48.1% 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. Survey data from across 19 countries reveal heterogeneity in attitudes toward acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine and suggest that trust in government is associated with vaccine confidence.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
In June 2020, a 19-country survey of 13,426 adults found that 71.5% would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, but only 48.1% would accept their employer’s recommendation to do so. Acceptance varied widely by country and was strongly associated with trust in government.
Key findings
- Overall, 71.5% reported they would take a proven safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine, and 48.1% said they would accept an employer recommendation to get vaccinated.
- Country variation was large: China had the highest positive response for the general vaccine question (631/712, 88.6%) and Russia the lowest (373/680, 54.9%); Poland had the highest negative response (182/666, 27.3%). For employer recommendation, China had 83.7% positive responses (596/712), while Russia had the lowest willingness (184/680, 27.1%) and highest negative response (278/680, 40.9%).
- Trust in government was associated with acceptance: OR = 1.67 (95% CI 1.54, 1.80) for the general vaccine question and OR = 4.35 (95% CI 4.01, 4.72) for the employer-recommendation question.
- Older age and higher income/education were positively associated with acceptance. For example, respondents aged 65+ vs 18–24 had OR = 1.73 (95% CI 1.48, 2.02) for the general question, and those earning >$32/day vs <$2/day had OR = 2.18 (95% CI 1.79, 2.64). Men were slightly less likely than women to respond positively (OR = 0.84; 95% CI 0.78, 0.91), and self/family COVID-19 sickness was not associated with acceptance (OR = 0.97; 95% CI 0.87, 1.08).
Methods
- The study analyzed two vaccine-acceptance questions from the COVID-SCORE online survey, collected June 16–20, 2020, from 13,426 respondents aged 18+ in 19 countries, with 619–773 participants per country.
- Participants were recruited through multiple international online panel providers; sampling was random and described elsewhere.
- Responses used a five-point Likert scale. Logistic regressions coded “completely agree” or “somewhat agree” as 1 and all other responses as 0, with univariate models against age, gender, income, education, COVID-19 sickness in self/family, country cases and mortality per million, and trust in government.
Limitations
- The paper states that public surveys are snapshots at a point in time, the survey occurred in a highly dynamic COVID-19 landscape, and reported willingness may not predict actual acceptance. It also notes that events after the survey may have increased hesitancy, and that employment status was not investigated for the age/employer-recommendation finding.
- The text makes evident that the regressions are univariate rather than multivariable-adjusted, so associations may not be independent.
- The online panel design may limit representativeness despite random sampling, and the outcomes are self-reported intentions rather than observed vaccination behavior.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
23 Own result · 8 Not checked yet · 6 Own method · 4 Own interpretation · 1 Partly supported · 1 No basis given · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In many countries, vaccine hesitancy and misinformation present substantial obstacles to achieving coverage and community immunity5,6.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Main
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [5] Larson, H. J., Jarrett, C., Eckersberger, E., Smith, D. M. D. & Paterson, P. Understanding vaccine hesitancy around vaccines and vaccination from a global perspective: a systematic review of published literature, 2007-2012. Vaccine 32, 2150–2159 (2014). source
- Partly supportedcites [6] Lane, S., MacDonald, N. E., Marti, M. & Dumolard, L. Vaccine hesitancy around the globe: analysis of three years of WHO/UNICEF Joint Reporting Form data—2015–2017. Vaccine 36, 3861–3867 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports vaccine hesitancy in the majority of countries and describes efforts to improve vaccine acceptance. That supports the claim that hesitancy is a widespread obstacle to vaccination, but our copy does not establish misinformation as a separate obstacle or assess effects on coverage or community immunity. (LLM, conf=0.83)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Respondents who said that they trusted their government were more likely to accept a vaccine than those who said that they did not (OR = 1.67; 95% CI (1.54, 1.80)).”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Gender differences were small, but the univariate association for both questions suggested that men were slightly less likely to respond positively than women, with an OR of 0.84 (95% CI (0.78, 0.91)) of men responding positively relative to women for the general question”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia).”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Abstract
plainn = 13,426- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This difference was strongest (odds ratio (OR) = 1.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.48, 2.02)) when responses from the oldest age cohort and those from the youngest age cohort were compared (Table 2).”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Respondents from Poland reported the highest proportion of negative responses (182 of 666, 27.3%)”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and 48.1% reported that they would accept their employer’s recommendation to do so.”
- Also stated in: § Discussion · hedged
“and 48.1% said that they would get vaccinated if their employer recommended it”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Abstract
hedgedn = 13,426- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Discussion · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, we observed high heterogeneity in responses between countries.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Discussion
plainn = 13,426- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“People aged 25–54, 55–64 and 65+ were more likely to accept the vaccine than those who were aged 18–24.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and an OR of 0.93 (95% CI (0.87, 1.00)) for the business-related question.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 7
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
- Probably not a substantial claim. 11
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When asked whether “You would accept a vaccine if it were recommended by your employer and was approved safe and effective by the government,” 14.0% (1,881 of 13,426) completely agreed, whereas 25.9% (3,478 of 13,426) somewhat or completely disagreed (Table 1).”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Respondents from China gave the highest proportion of positive responses (631 of 712 respondants, 88.6%) and the lowest proportion of negative responses (5 of 712, 0.7%) when asked if they would take a ‘proven, safe and effective vaccine’.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A similar trend was observed in regard to acceptance of the vaccine if one’s employer required it, except that responses from the oldest age cohort were similar to the youngest age cohort.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Russia had the highest proportion of negative responses (278 of 680, 40.9%) and the lowest proportion of respondents (184 of 680, 27.1%) willing to accept their employer’s recommendation (Supplementary Table 1).”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was considerable variation by country, with China again having the highest proportion of positive responses (596 of 712, 83.7%) and the lowest proportion of negative responses (26 of 712, 3.7%).”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine”
- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
“Of these, 71.5% responded that they would take a vaccine if it were proven safe and effective”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Abstract
plainn = 13,426- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No personally identifiable information was collected or stored.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Methods > Study participants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Misinformation spread through multiple channels could have a considerable effect on the acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine8.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Main
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Cornwall, W. Officials gird for a war on vaccine misinformation. Science 369, 14–19 (2020). source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Anti-vaccination activists are already campaigning in multiple countries against the need for a vaccine, with some denying the existence of COVID-19 altogether7.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Main
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] Enserink, M. & Cohen, J. Fact-checking Judy Mikovits, the controversial virologist attacking Anthony Fauci in a viral conspiracy video. Science https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/fact-checking-judy-mikovits-controversial-virologist-attacking-anthony-fauci-viral (2020). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Respondents’ identities were verified using IP addresses and mobile phone numbers to ensure that each participant was real and unique upon initial registration.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Methods > Study participants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study was approved by Emerson College, USA (institutional review board protocol no. 20–023-F-E-6/12), with an expiration date of June 11, 2021.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Methods > Study participants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This particular survey was conducted in the context of a highly dynamic and changing landscape, with daily variations in perceived disease threat and COVID-19 vaccine development itself.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, reporting one’s willingness to get vaccinated might not be necessarily a good predictor of acceptance, as vaccine decisions are multifactorial and can change over time.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Discussion
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The accelerated pace of vaccine development has further heightened public anxieties and could compromise acceptance9.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Main
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] Fadda, M., Albanese, E. & Suggs, L. S. When a COVID-19 vaccine is ready, will we all be ready for it? Int. J. Public Health 65, 711–712 (2020). source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Lessons learned from previous infectious disease outbreaks and public health emergencies, including HIV, H1N1, SARS, MERS and Ebola, remind us that trusted sources of information and guidance are fundamental to disease control16.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [16] Siegrist, M. & Zingg, A. The role of public trust during pandemics: implications for crisis communication. Eur. Psychol. 19, 23–32 (2014). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Researchers have identified promising interventions for building confidence and reducing vaccine hesitancy in different contexts12,13”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] Thomson, A., Vallée-Tourangeau, G. & Suggs, L. S. Strategies to increase vaccine acceptance and uptake: from behavioral insights to context-specific, culturally-appropriate, evidence-based communications and interventions. Vaccine 36, 6457–6458 (2018). source
- Not checked yetcites [13] European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Catalogue of interventions addressing vaccine hesitancy. https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/portal/files/documents/Catalogue-interventions-vaccine-hesitancy.pdf (2017).
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It must be kept in mind that all public surveys of the type reported here are snapshots taken at a point in time.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The online questionnaire was administered by Emerson College to gather information from respondents after obtaining their written, informed consent about the survey and this project.”
§ A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine > Methods > Study participants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
The level of vaccine acceptance required for community immunity is higher than the levels of willingness observed in most of the 19 countries.
“In most of the 19 countries surveyed in our study, current levels of willingness to accept a COVID-19 vaccine are insufficient to meet the requirements for community immunity.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The heterogeneity analysis reported in Fig. 5, in which we analysed whether vaccination rates differ by age, sex, schooling and wealth variables, was not pre-specified and followed heterogeneity tests that are common in the vaccine literature54.”
From Last-mile delivery increases vaccine uptake in Sierra Leone (2024) · cites this paper as [54]
In the citing paper
“For COVID-19, information from employers and government sources has been shown to improve vaccine acceptance rates, which range from 55% to 90% around the world244.”
From mRNA vaccines for infectious diseases: principles, delivery and clinical translation (2021) · cites this paper as [244]
In the citing paper
“For COVID-19, information from employers and government sources has been shown to improve vaccine acceptance rates, which range from 55% to 90% around the world244.”
From mRNA vaccines for infectious diseases: principles, delivery and clinical translation (2021) · cites this paper as [244]
Citations
Cites
Vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants
MacDonald, N. E. (2015) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.036 · Cited by 5,573
The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness
Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/266350 · Cited by 3,543
Larson, H. J., Jarrett, C., Eckersberger, E., Smith, D. M. D., & Paterson, P. (2014) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.01.081 · Cited by 2,254
Self-citationMeasuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review
Larson, H. J., Clarke, R. M., Jarrett, C., Eckersberger, E., Levine, Z., Schulz, W. S., & Paterson, P. (2018) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2018.1459252 · Cited by 789
Self-citationLane, S., MacDonald, N. E., Marti, M., & Dumolard, L. (2018) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.03.063 · Cited by 530
The Role of Public Trust During Pandemics: Implications for Crisis Communication
Siegrist, M., & Zingg, A. (2014) · European Psychologist · doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000169 · Cited by 420
Karafillakis, E., & Larson, H. J. (2017) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.07.061 · Cited by 317
Self-citationQuinn, S. C., Parmer, J., Freimuth, V. S., Hilyard, K. M., Musa, D., & Kim, K. H. (2013) · Biosecurity and Bioterrorism Biodefense Strategy Practice and Science · doi:10.1089/bsp.2012.0048 · Cited by 235
Lazarus, J. V., Ratzan, S., Palayew, A., Billari, F. C., Binagwaho, A., Kimball, S., Larson, H. J., Melegaro, A., Rabin, K., White, T. M., et al. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0240011 · Cited by 232
Self-citationExposing concerns about vaccination in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review
Muñoz, D. C., Llamas, L. M., & Bosch‐Capblanch, X. (2015) · International Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1007/s00038-015-0715-6 · Cited by 160
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 901–1,000 of 1,000
Allagoa, D. O., Oriji, P. C., Tekenah, E. S., Obagah, L., Njoku, C., Afolabi, A. S., & Atemie, G. (2021) · International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health · doi:10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20211733 · Cited by 17
Parvej, M. I., Sultana, S., Tabassum, M., Mannan, S. E., & Ahmed, F. (2021) · Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine · doi:10.4103/1995-7645.321610 · Cited by 17
COVID-19 Vaccine Perception in South Korea: Web Crawling Approach
Lee, H., Noh, E. B., Park, S. J., Nam, H. K., Lee, T. H., Lee, G. R., & Nam, E. W. (2021) · JMIR Public Health and Surveillance · doi:10.2196/31409 · Cited by 17
Explaining COVID-19 Vaccine Rejection Using Social Cognitive Theory in Qassim, Saudi Arabia
AlSaeed, A. A., & Rabbani, U. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9111304 · Cited by 17
Narapureddy, B. R., Muzammil, K., Alshahrani, M. Y., Alkhathami, A. G., Alsabaani, A. A., AlShahrani, A. M., Dawria, A., Nasir, N., Reddy, L. K. V., & Alam, M. M. (2021) · Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare · doi:10.2147/jmdh.s340431 · Cited by 17
Pothisa, T., Ong-Artborirak, P., Seangpraw, K., Tonchoy, P., Kantow, S., Auttama, N., Boonyathee, S., Choowanthanapakorn, M., Bootsikeaw, S., Panta, P., et al. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph19031521 · Cited by 17
Dadras, O., SeyedAlinaghi, S., Karimi, A., Shamsabadi, A., Mahdiabadi, S., Mohammadi, P., Amiri, A., Shojaei, A., Pashaei, Z., Mirzapour, P., et al. (2022) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2022.2043719 · Cited by 17
Ousseine, Y. M., Vaux, S., Vandentorren, S., Bonmarin, I., Champenois, K., Lydié, N., & Velter, A. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph19095372 · Cited by 17
Public anxiety through various stages of COVID-19 coping: Evidence from China
Wu, Y., Zhang, T., Ye, Z., Chen, K., van der Kuijp, J., Sun, X., Han, G., Zhao, Y., Liu, Y., & Huang, L. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0270229 · Cited by 17
Mahmud, I., Imam, M. H. A., Vinnakota, D., Kheirallah, K. A., Jaber, M. F., Abalkhail, A., Alasqah, I., Alslamah, T., & Kabir, R. (2022) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines10071159 · Cited by 17
Yang, J., Liao, Y., Hua, Q., Sun, C., & Lv, H. (2022) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.913478 · Cited by 17
Liu, M., Zhao, R., & Ngai, C. S. B. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0279500 · Cited by 17
Willingness to pay for a COVID-19 vaccine and its associated determinants in Iran
Soofi, M., Kok, G., Soltani, S., Karyani, A. K., Najafi, F., & Matin, B. K. (2023) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1036110 · Cited by 17
Ayieko, S. A., Baker, K., Messiah, S. E., Lewis, B., & Markham, C. M. (2023) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines11071233 · Cited by 17
Mudenda, S., Daka, V., Matafwali, S. K., Skosana, P., Chabalenge, B., Mukosha, M., Fadare, J. O., Mfune, R. L., Witika, B. A., Alumeta, M. G., et al. (2023) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines11081350 · Cited by 17
Inference of epidemic dynamics in the COVID-19 era and beyond
Cori, A., & Kucharski, A. J. (2024) · Epidemics · doi:10.1016/j.epidem.2024.100784 · Cited by 18
COVID-19 vaccine rollout management and communication in Europe: one year on
Warren, G. W., & Löfstedt, R. E. (2021) · Journal of Risk Research · doi:10.1080/13669877.2021.2001674 · Cited by 17
Lyu, Y., Lai, X., Ma, X., Cao, L., Hong, L., Wang, J., Zhang, H., Jing, R., Feng, H., Guo, J., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.760388 · Cited by 17
Kibbi, L. E., Metawee, M., Hmamouchi, I., Abdulateef, N., Halabi, H. M., Eissa, M., Rakawi, M. E., Masri, B. K., Abutiban, F., Hamdi, W., et al. (2021) · The Lancet Rheumatology · doi:10.1016/s2665-9913(21)00368-4 · Cited by 17
Al-Ayyadhi, N., Ramadan, M. M., Al-Tayar, E. B. A., Al‐Mathkoori, R., & Al-Awadhi, S. (2021) · Risk Management and Healthcare Policy · doi:10.2147/rmhp.s338520 · Cited by 17
Boshra, M. S., Hussein, R. R. S., Mohsen, M., Elberry, A. A., Altyar, A. E., Tammam, M., & Sarhan, R. M. (2022) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines10020292 · Cited by 17
Kalu, M. E., Oyinlola, O., Ibekaku, M. C., Adandom, I. I., Iwuagwu, A. O., Ezulike, J. C. D., Nwachukwu, E. C., & Uduonu, E. M. (2022) · American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · doi:10.4269/ajtmh.21-0515 · Cited by 19
Su, J., Jia, Z., Wang, X., Qin, F., Chen, R., Wu, Y., Lu, B., Lan, C., Qin, T., Liao, Y., et al. (2022) · BMC Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1186/s12879-022-07452-w · Cited by 17
Wu, L., Guo, X., Liu, J., Ma, X., Huang, Z., & Sun, X. (2022) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2022.2075211 · Cited by 17
COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and perceived stigma in patients with depression: a network perspective
Cai, H. X., Bai, W., Du, X., Zhang, L., Zhang, L., Li, Y., Liu, H., Tang, Y., Jackson, T., Cheung, T. C. C., et al. (2022) · Translational Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/s41398-022-02170-y · Cited by 17
Kim, K., Lee, C., Ihm, J., & Kim, Y. (2022) · Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10810730.2022.2130479 · Cited by 17
The effect of altruism on COVID-19 vaccination rates
Recio, L. Á. H., Rodríguez, D. P., Atienza, P., Garzón, A. J., & Cantarero, D. (2023) · Health Economics Review · doi:10.1186/s13561-022-00415-6 · Cited by 17
Resistance to COVID-19 vaccination and the social contract: evidence from Italy
Kreps, S. E., & Kriner, D. L. (2023) · npj Vaccines · doi:10.1038/s41541-023-00660-8 · Cited by 17
Palacios, J., Fan, Y., Yoeli, E., Wang, J., Chai, Y., Sun, W., Rand, D. G., & Zheng, S. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2100719119 · Cited by 17
Gautam, A., Dhara, B., Mukherjee, D., Mukhopadhyay, D., Roy, S., Ganguly, S. S., Chowdhury, A. D., Goswami, S., Dey, S., Basu, S., et al. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-106643/v1 · Cited by 17
Hammer, H. C., Cristea, V., Dub, T., & Sivelä, J. (2021) · Epidemiology and Infection · doi:10.1017/s0950268821001217 · Cited by 17
Takamatsu, A., Honda, H., Kojima, T., Murata, K., & Babcock, H. M. (2021) · Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology · doi:10.1017/ice.2021.325 · Cited by 16
The Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance in Sumatra
Sidarta, C., Kurniawan, A., Lugito, N. P. H., Siregar, J. I., Sungono, V., Heriyanto, R. S., Sieto, N. L., Halim, D. A., Jodhinata, C., Rizki, S. A., et al. (2022) · Kesmas National Public Health Journal · doi:10.21109/kesmas.v17i1.4958 · Cited by 16
Chen, J., Cai, W., Liu, T., Zhou, Y., Jin, Y., Yang, Y., Chen, S., Tang, K., & Li, C. (2022) · Rheumatology & autoimmunity · doi:10.1002/rai2.12028 · Cited by 16
Bronfman, N. C., Repetto, P. B., Cisternas, P. C., Castañeda, J. V., & Cordón, P. (2022) · International Journal of Public Health · doi:10.3389/ijph.2022.1604290 · Cited by 18
Wu, L., Wang, X., Li, R., Huang, Z., Guo, X., Liu, J., Yan, H., & Sun, X. (2022) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines10050654 · Cited by 17
Betta, S., Castellini, G., Acampora, M., & Barello, S. (2022) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines10040559 · Cited by 16
Salesi, V. K., Tsui, K. W. H., Fu, X., & Gilbey, A. (2022) · Transport Policy · doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.05.010 · Cited by 16
Abay, E. S., Belew, M. D., Ketsela, B. S., Mengistu, E. E., Getachew, L. S., Teferi, Y. A., & Zerihun, A. B. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0269923 · Cited by 16
Perceptions and attitudes towards Covid-19 vaccines: narratives from members of the UK public
Ajana, B., Engstler, E., Ismail, A., & Kousta, M. (2022) · Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1007/s10389-022-01728-w · Cited by 16
Sánchez-García, J. C., Moreno, N. P. C., Tovar-Gálvez, M. I., Cortés‐Martín, J., Liñán-González, A., Olmedo, L. A., & Rodríguez-Blanque, R. (2022) · Biomedicines · doi:10.3390/biomedicines10102554 · Cited by 17
Could Belief in Fake News Predict Vaccination Behavior in the Elderly?
Pakalniškienė, V., Kairys, A., Jurkuvėnas, V., Mikuličiūtė, V., & Ivleva, V. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph192214901 · Cited by 18
COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in sub-Saharan African countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Gudayu, T. W., & Mengistie, H. T. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13037 · Cited by 18
Martinelli, M., & Veltri, G. (2023) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.14200 · Cited by 16
Attitudes Toward COVID-19 Vaccines Among Pregnant and Recently Pregnant Individuals
Williams, J. T. B., Kurlandsky, K., Breslin, K. D., Durfee, M. J., Stein, A., Hurley, L. P., Shoup, J. A., Reifler, L. M., Daley, M. F., Lewin, B. J., et al. (2024) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.5479 · Cited by 16
Salter, S. M., Singh, G., Nissen, L. M., Trentino, K. M., Murray, K., Lee, K., Kop, B. R., Peters, I., & Leeb, A. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048109 · Cited by 16
Yu, Y., Lau, M. M. C., Jiang, H., & Lau, J. T. F. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9080847 · Cited by 16
Khan, Z. A., Allana, R., Afzal, I., Ali, A. S., Mariam, O., Aslam, R., Shah, I. A., Allana, A. R., Haider, M. M., Jandani, R., et al. (2021) · Vacunas · doi:10.1016/j.vacun.2021.08.002 · Cited by 16
Bereitschaft zur COVID-19-Impfung unter Beschäftigten im Gesundheitswesen in Deutschland
Schug, C., Erim, Y., Geiser, F., Hiebel, N., Beschoner, P., Jerg‐Bretzke, L., Albus, C., Weidner, K., Steudte‐Schmiedgen, S., Borho, A., et al. (2021) · Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz · doi:10.1007/s00103-021-03418-6 · Cited by 16
Lucas, T., Manning, M. A., Strelan, P., Köpetz, C., Agostini, M., Bélanger, J. J., Gützkow, B., Kreienkamp, J., & Leander, N. P. (2022) · Translational Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1093/tbm/ibab153 · Cited by 16
Public Sentiment Analysis In Social Media On The SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Using VADER Lexicon Polarity
الجرادي, ج., & مهيوب, م. (2022) · مجلة العلوم التربوية والدراسات الإنسانية · doi:10.55074/2152-000-022-021 · Cited by 16
Jing, R., Fang, H., Wang, H., & Wang, J. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.841189 · Cited by 16
Nizigiyimana, A., Acharya, D., Morillon, G. F., & Poder, T. G. (2022) · Patient Preference and Adherence · doi:10.2147/ppa.s376103 · Cited by 16
Khare, S., Niharika, N., Singh, A., Hussain, I., Singh, N. B., & Singh, S. C. (2022) · Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s12010-022-04181-3 · Cited by 16
Kambali, P. N., Abbasi, A., & Nataraj, C. (2022) · Nonlinear Dynamics · doi:10.1007/s11071-022-08125-8 · Cited by 16
Dasch, S., Wachinger, J., Bärnighausen, T., Chen, S., & McMahon, S. A. (2023) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-022-14587-7 · Cited by 16
Wang, H., Yu, B., Chen, X., & Yan, H. (2023) · Global Health Journal · doi:10.1016/j.glohj.2023.02.003 · Cited by 16
Mudenda, S., Mukosha, M., Hikaambo, C. N., Meyer, J. C., Fadare, J. O., Kampamba, M., Kalungia, A. C., Munsaka, S. M., Okoro, R. N., Daka, V., et al. (2022) · Malawi Medical Journal · doi:10.4314/mmj.v34i4.8 · Cited by 16
Sharma, N., Basu, S., Lalwani, H., Rao, S., Malik, M., Garg, S., Shrivastava, R., & Singh, M. M. (2023) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines11071177 · Cited by 17
Liu, D., Luo, L., Xie, F., Yu, Z., Feei, Z., Wang, Y., & Wan, Z. (2021) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2021.1899732 · Cited by 16
COVID-19 vaccination campaign trends and challenges in select Asian countries
Huh, J., & Dubey, A. (2021) · Asian Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1080/02185377.2021.1979062 · Cited by 15
Yuen, V. W. H. (2022) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.02.086 · Cited by 15
Asumah, M. N., Abubakari, A., Fosu, B., Dzantor, E. K., Agyapong, P. D., Harrison, S., Apio, G., & Abukari, A.-K. (2022) · Ghana Medical Journal · doi:10.4314/gmj.v56i3.4 · Cited by 15
del Giudice, G. M., Folcarelli, L., Polla, G. D., Napoli, A., & Angelillo, I. F. (2023) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines11040737 · Cited by 15
Ali, H. T., Ashour, Y., Rais, M. A., Barakat, M., Rezeq, T. A., Sharkawy, M. M., Lapic, M., Soliman, Z. A., Abdullah, A., Allahham, A., et al. (2023) · Annals of Medicine and Surgery · doi:10.1097/ms9.0000000000000921 · Cited by 15
Surapaneni, K. M., Kaur, M., Kaur, R., Grover, A., & Joshi, A. (2021) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/29733 · Cited by 15
Kidney Transplant Recipient Attitudes Toward a SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine
Ou, M. T., Boyarsky, B. J., Zeiser, L. B., Chiang, T. P., Ruddy, J. A., Rasmussen, S. E. V. P., Martin, J., Russell, J. S. C., Durand, C. M., Avery, R. K., et al. (2021) · Transplantation Direct · doi:10.1097/txd.0000000000001171 · Cited by 15
The roles of experiences and risk perception in the practice of preventative behaviors of COVID-19
Fadel, T., Travis, J., Harris, S., & Webb, G. (2021) · Pathogens and Global Health · doi:10.1080/20477724.2021.1957595 · Cited by 15
Shallal, A. B., Abada, E., Musallam, R., Fehmi, O., Kaljee, L., Fehmi, Z., Alzouhayli, S. J., Ujayli, D., Dankerlui, D., Kim, S., et al. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9090942 · Cited by 15
Hafizh, M., Badri, Y., Mahmud, S., Hafez, A., & Choe, P. (2021) · Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment · doi:10.1080/10911359.2021.1973642 · Cited by 15
Public Preferences for a COVID-19 Vaccination Program in Quebec: A Discrete Choice Experiment
Morillon, G. F., & Poder, T. G. (2022) · PharmacoEconomics · doi:10.1007/s40273-021-01124-4 · Cited by 15
Correlates of Covid-19 Vaccine Acceptance among Residents of Ohio: A Cross-sectional Study
Haile, Z. T., Ruhil, A. V. S., Bates, B. R., van Hall, O., & Grijalva, M. J. (2022) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-022-12661-8 · Cited by 15
Covid-19: desafios para a organização e repercussões nos sistemas e serviços de saúde
Portela, M. C., Reis, L. G. D. C., & Lima, S. M. L. (2022) · Série Informação para ação na Covid-19 | Fiocruz eBooks · doi:10.7476/9786557081587 · Cited by 24
Factors affecting intention to take COVID-19 vaccine among Pakistani University Students
Hossian, M., Khan, M. A. S., Nazir, A., Nabi, M. H., Hasan, M., Maliha, R., Hossain, M. A., Rashid, M. U., Itrat, N., & Hawlader, M. D. H. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0262305 · Cited by 15
Mekonnen, C. K., Demissie, N. G., Beko, Z. W., Ferede, Y. M., & Abate, H. K. (2022) · International Journal of Africa Nursing Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ijans.2022.100401 · Cited by 15
Peng, L., Jiang, H., Guo, Y., & Hu, D. (2022) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.811792 · Cited by 17
Jantzen, R., Maltais, M. L., & Broët, P. (2022) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.756037 · Cited by 15
Fullerton, M. M., Benham, J. L., Graves, A., Fazel, S. S., Doucette, E. J., Oxoby, R. J., Mourali, M., Boucher, J.-C., Constantinescu, C., Leigh, J. P., et al. (2022) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054635 · Cited by 15
Voo, T. C., Ballantyne, A., Ng, C. J., Cowling, B. J., Xiao, J., Phang, K. C., Kaur, S., Jenarun, G., Kumar, V., Lim, J. M., et al. (2022) · International Journal of Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2022.04.021 · Cited by 15
Acceptance and Attitude of Parents Regarding COVID-19 Vaccine for Children: A Cross-Sectional Study
Mohan, R., Pandey, V., Kumar, A. S., Gangadevi, P., Goel, A. D., Joseph, J., & Kurien, N. (2022) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.24518 · Cited by 15
Modulating Fingolimod (FTY720) Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Activity Using a PLGA-Based Drug Delivery System
Miranda, R. R., Ferreira, N. N., de Souza, E. E., Lins, P. M. P., Ferreira, L. M. B., Krüger, A., Cardoso, V. M. D. O., Durigon, E. L., Wrenger, C., & Zucolotto, V. (2022) · ACS Applied Bio Materials · doi:10.1021/acsabm.2c00349 · Cited by 15
Pirrotta, L., Guidotti, E., Tramontani, C., Bignardelli, E., Venturi⋄, G., & Rosis, S. D. (2022) · Health Policy · doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.08.001 · Cited by 15
Limaye, R. J., Balgobin, K. R., Michel, A. E., Schulz, G., & Erchick, D. J. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0274966 · Cited by 15
Qin, C., Liu, Q., Du, M., Yan, W., Tao, L., Wang, Y., Liu, M., & Liu, J. (2022) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2022.2140530 · Cited by 15
COVID-19 Pandemic and Vaccination Skepticism
Anas, A. L., Salifu, M., & Zakaria, H. L. (2023) · Human Arenas · doi:10.1007/s42087-023-00334-w · Cited by 15
Addressing the challenges of implementing evidence-based prioritisation in global health
Hayman, D. T. S., Barraclough, R. K., Muglia, L. J., McGovern, V. P., Afolabi, M. O., N′jai, A. U., Ambe, J., Atim, C., McClelland, A., Paterson, B., et al. (2023) · BMJ Global Health · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012450 · Cited by 15
Adella, G. A., Gelaw, K. A., Gebeyehu, N. A., Azeze, G. A., Yeshambel, A., Lake, E. A., Abebe, E. C., & Dejenie, T. A. (2021) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2021.2011651 · Cited by 15
Gesualdo, F., Bucci, L. M., Rizzo, C., & Tozzi, A. E. (2021) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2020.1865048 · Cited by 15
Salalι, G. D., & Uysal, M. S. (2021) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2021.07.09.21260228 · Cited by 15
From Anti-vax Intentions to Vaccination: Panel and Experimental Evidence from Nine Countries
Galasso, V., Pons, V., Profeta, P. A., Becher, M., Brouard, S., & Foucault, M. (2022) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w29741 · Cited by 16
Mubarak, A. S., Baabbad, A. S., Almalki, N. A., Alrbaiai, G. T., Alsufyani, G. A., & kabrah, D. K. (2022) · Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care · doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1255_21 · Cited by 14
Kessler, S. E., & Aunger, R. V. (2022) · Evolution Medicine and Public Health · doi:10.1093/emph/eoac004 · Cited by 16
Glintborg, B., Jensen, D. V., Terslev, L., Hendricks, O., Østergaard, M., Rasmussen, S. H., Pfeiffer‐Jensen, M., Adelsten, T., Colic, A., Danebod, K., et al. (2022) · The Journal of Rheumatology · doi:10.3899/jrheum.211280 · Cited by 14
Adella, G. A., Gelaw, K. A., Gebeyehu, N. A., Azeze, G. A., Alene, T., Molla, S., Kassie, G. A., Birlie, T. A., Gebrekidan, A. Y., Eshetu, K., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.917925 · Cited by 14
Exosomes-based particles as inhalable COVID-19 vaccines
Lü, F., Wang, L., Wang, X., & Zhang, H. (2023) · Biomedical Technology · doi:10.1016/j.bmt.2023.01.003 · Cited by 14
Psychosocial dimensions of vaccine hesitancy: A systematic review
Rizzo, M., Gattino, S., Trombetta, T., Calandri, E., & Piccoli, N. D. (2024) · Journal of Community Psychology · doi:10.1002/jcop.23133 · Cited by 14
Ebrahimi, O. V., Sandbakken, E. M., Moss, S. M., Johnson, S. U., Hoffart, A., Bauermeister, S., Solbakken, O. A., Westlye, L. T., & Leonardsen, E. H. (2025) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-025-03953-y · Cited by 14
2019 Novel Coronavirus Vaccination among Post-graduate Residents and Fellows
Abohelwa, M., Elmassry, M., Abdelmalek, J., Payne, D., & NUGENT, K. M. (2021) · Journal of Primary Care & Community Health · doi:10.1177/21501327211022978 · Cited by 14
Ye, X., Ye, W., Yu, J., Gao, Y., Ren, Z., Chen, L., Dong, A., Qian, Y., Zhan, C., Lin, Y., et al. (2021) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2021.1985354 · Cited by 14
Behrouzi, B., & Udell, J. A. (2021) · Current Atherosclerosis Reports · doi:10.1007/s11883-021-00973-w · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Lazarus, J. V., Ratzan, S. C., Palayew, A., Gostin, L. O., Larson, H. J., Rabin, K., Kimball, S., & El-Mohandes, A.
- Affiliations
- Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ES)
- City University of New York (US)
- Georgetown University (US)
- London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
- Emerson College (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lazarus, Jeffrey V.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Nature Medicine
- Published
- 2020-10-20
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 225-228
- ISSN
- 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
- 1546-170X
- PMC
- PMC7573523
- OpenAlex
- W3093974194
- Semantic Scholar
- abe8c2a1c2a072c6c0f729204a329d82fffad38c
- Cited by
- 2,904
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 91 · 2025: 109 · 2024: 276 · 2023: 541 · 2022: 950 · 2021: 901 · 2020: 32
- FWCI
- 335.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2021-01-11)
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Nature Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
- Scholarship - GEORGETOWN LAW (Georgetown University) (submittedVersion)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- City University of New York
- Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades (CEX 2018-000806-S)
- Centres de Recerca de Catalunya (CEX2018-000806-S)
- Generalitat de Catalunya (CEX2018-000806-S)
- Università Bocconi
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Keywords
- COVID-19 vaccines, vaccine acceptance, vaccine hesitancy, vaccine confidence, public trust in government, cross-national comparison, vaccine attitudes
- MeSH terms
- COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 Vaccines, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, Internationality, Young Adult
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
