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 401–500 of 1,000
Cadeddu, C., Regazzi, L., Bonaccorsi, G., Rosano, A., Unim, B., Griebler, R., Link, T., CASTRO, P. D., D’Elia, R., Mastrilli, V., et al. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph19084429 · Cited by 43
Batteux, E., Bilovich, A., Johnson, S. G. B., & Tuckett, D. (2022) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051352 · Cited by 43
PREDICTORS OF UPTAKE OF A POTENTIAL COVID-19 VACCINE AMONG NIGERIAN ADULTSPreprint
Olomofe, C. O., Soyemi, V. K., Udomah, B. F., Owolabi, A. O., Ajumuka, E. E., Igbokwe, C. M., Ashaolu, U. O., Adeyemi, A. O., Aremu-Kasumu, Y. B., Dada, O. F., et al. (2021) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.12.28.20248965 · Cited by 43
Providing normative information increases intentions to accept a COVID-19 vaccinePreprint
Moehring, A., Collis, A., Garimella, K., Rahimian, M. A., Aral, S., & Eckles, D. (2021) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3782082 · Cited by 45
COVID-19 Is Not the Flu: Four Graphs From Four Countries
Stojanovic, J., Boucher, V. G., Boyle, J. A., Enticott, J., Lavoie, K., & Bacon, S. (2020) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.628479 · Cited by 42
Attia, S., Mausbach, K., Klugar, M., Howaldt, H., & Riad, A. (2022) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.846861 · Cited by 43
COVID-19 in Brazil: a 3-year update
Martins, J. P., Siqueira, B. A., Sansone, N. M. S., & Marson, F. A. L. (2023) · Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease · doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2023.116074 · Cited by 42
Vulpe, S., & Rughiniş, C. (2021) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.01.063 · Cited by 42
Who Should Get COVID-19 Vaccine First? A Survey to Evaluate Hospital Workers’ Opinion
Craxì, L., Casuccio, A., Amodio, E., & Restivo, V. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9030189 · Cited by 42
COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and reasons for or against adherence among dentists
Belingheri, M., Roncalli, M. G., Riva, M. A., Paladino, M. E., & Teruzzi, C. M. (2021) · The Journal of the American Dental Association · doi:10.1016/j.adaj.2021.04.020 · Cited by 42
Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccine Among Refugees in the United States
Zhang, M., Gurung, A., Anglewicz, P. A., Subedi, P., Payton, C., Ali, A., Ibrahim, A., Haider, M. Z., Hamidi, N., Atem, J., et al. (2021) · Public Health Reports · doi:10.1177/00333549211045838 · Cited by 42
Self-citation“Please, you go first!” preferences for a COVID-19 vaccine among adults in the Netherlands
Mouter, N., de Ruijter, A., de Wit, G. A., Lambooij, M., van Wijhe, M., van Exel, J. N. A., & Kessels, R. (2021) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114626 · Cited by 49
Nath, R., Imtiaz, A., Nath, S. D., & Hasan, E. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9121405 · Cited by 42
Kumar, N., Corpus, I., Hans, M., Harle, N., Yang, N., McDonald, C., Sakai, S. N., Janmohamed, K., Chen, K., Altice, F. L., et al. (2022) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-022-12824-7 · Cited by 44
Riccò, M., Ferraro, P., Peruzzi, S., Balzarini, F., & Ranzieri, S. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9080889 · Cited by 42
Paul, A., Sikdar, D., Mahanta, J., Ghosh, S. K., Jabed, M. A., Paul, S., Yeasmin, F., Sikdar, S., Chowdhury, B., & Nath, T. K. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0256493 · Cited by 41
Ahiakpa, J. K., Cosmas, N. T., Anyiam, F. E., Enalume, K. O., Lawan, I., Gabriel, I. B., Oforka, C. L., Dahir, H. G., Salisu, T. F., Nwobodo, M. A., et al. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0268230 · Cited by 41
SARS‐CoV‐2 Omicron and its current known unknowns: A narrative review
Le, T. T. B., Vasanthakumaran, T., Hau, N. T. H., Hung, I., Luu, M. N., Khan, Z. A., An, N. T., Tran, V. P., Lee, W. J., Aziz, J. M. A., et al. (2022) · Reviews in Medical Virology · doi:10.1002/rmv.2398 · Cited by 42
Assessing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and barriers to uptake in Sub-Saharan Africa
Wollburg, P. R., Markhof, Y. V., Kanyanda, S. S. E., & Zezza, A. (2023) · Communications Medicine · doi:10.1038/s43856-023-00330-9 · Cited by 41
Kruk, M. E., Kapoor, N. R., Lewis, T. P., Arsenault, C., Boutsikari, E. C., Breda, J., Carai, S., Croke, K. G., Dayalu, R., Fink, G., et al. (2023) · The Lancet Global Health · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(23)00499-0 · Cited by 45
Sharing Pandemic Vaccination Certificates through Blockchain: Case Study and Performance Evaluation
Hernández-Ramos, J. L., Καρόπουλος, Γ., Geneiatakis, D., Martin, T., Kambourakis, G., & Fovino, I. N. (2021) · Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing · doi:10.1155/2021/2427896 · Cited by 41
Alawadhi, E., Zein, D., Mallallah, F., Haider, N. B., & Hossain, A. (2021) · Risk Management and Healthcare Policy · doi:10.2147/rmhp.s300602 · Cited by 41
Yang, Y. J., Dobalian, A., & Ward, K. D. (2021) · Journal of Community Health · doi:10.1007/s10900-021-00993-2 · Cited by 41
Exploring perception and hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccine: A study from Jordan
Farha, R. K. A., Alzoubi, K. H., Khabour, O. F., & Alfaqih, M. A. (2021) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2021.1888633 · Cited by 41
Giuliani, M., Ichino, A., Bonomi, A., Martoni, R. M., Cammino, S., & Gorini, A. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9080810 · Cited by 41
Determinants of access to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: a preliminary approach
de Oliveira, B. R. B., Sobral, A. I. G. D. P., Marinho, M., Sobral, M. F. F., Melo, A. D. S., & Duarte, G. B. (2021) · International Journal for Equity in Health · doi:10.1186/s12939-021-01520-4 · Cited by 41
Effect of a Concise Educational Program on COVID-19 Vaccination Attitudes
Kaim, A., Siman‐Tov, M., Jaffe, E., & Adini, B. B. (2021) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.767447 · Cited by 41
Acceptance rate and risk perception towards the COVID-19 vaccine in Botswana
Tlale, L. B., Gabaitiri, L., Totolo, L. K., Smith, G., Puswane-Katse, O., Ramonna, E., Mothowaeng, B., Tlhakanelo, J. T., Masupe, T., Rankgoane-Pono, G., et al. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0263375 · Cited by 41
Bellis, M. A., Hughes, K. E., Ford, K., Madden, H. C. E., Glendinning, F., & Wood, S. K. (2022) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053915 · Cited by 42
Geng, H. Z., Cao, K., Zhang, J., Wu, K., Wang, G., & Liu, C. (2022) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2022.2054260 · Cited by 45
Luk, T. T., Lui, J. H. T., & Wang, M. P. (2022) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/39063 · Cited by 43
Factors affecting nurses' intention to accept the COVID‐19 vaccine: A cross‐sectional study
Rabi, R., Maraqa, B. N., Nazzal, Z. A. S., & Zink, T. (2021) · Public Health Nursing · doi:10.1111/phn.12907 · Cited by 40
Abdulah, D. M. (2021) · Journal of Medical Virology · doi:10.1002/jmv.27255 · Cited by 40
Hailemariam, S., Mekonnen, B., Shifera, N., Endalkachew, B., Asnake, M., Assefa, A., & Qanche, Q. (2021) · SAGE Open Medicine · doi:10.1177/20503121211038454 · Cited by 40
de Sousa, Á. F. L., Teixeira, J. R. B., Lua, I., Souza, F. D. O., Ferreira, A. J. F., Schneider, G., de Carvalho, H. E. F., de Oliveira, L. B., Lima, S. V. M. A., de Sousa, A. R., et al. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9101167 · Cited by 40
Bitar, A. N., Zawiah, M., Al-Ashwal, F. Y., Kubas, M. A., Saeed, R. M., Abduljabbar, R., Jaber, A. A. S., Sulaiman, S. A. S., & Khan, A. H. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0248325 · Cited by 40
Levin‐Zamir, D. (2020) · Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10810730.2021.1884773 · Cited by 40
Italian Adults’ Likelihood of Getting COVID-19 Vaccine: A Second Online Survey
Biasio, L. R., Bonaccorsi, G., Lorini, C., Mazzini, D., & Pecorelli, S. L. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9030268 · Cited by 40
Hyland, P., Vallières, F., Shevlin, M. E., Bentall, R. P., McKay, R., Hartman, T. K., McBride, O., & Murphy, J. (2021) · Public Health · doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2021.04.009 · Cited by 40
Anaphylaxis associated with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines: Approach to allergy investigation
Turk, V. E. (2021) · Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.clim.2021.108748 · Cited by 40
Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy: a cross-sectional study in Saudi Arabia
Yahia, A. I. O., Alshahrani, A., Alsulmi, W. G. H., Alqarni, M. M. M., Abdulrahim, T. K. A., Heba, W. F. H., Alqarni, T., Alharthi, K. Z., & Buhran, A. A. A. (2021) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2021.1950506 · Cited by 40
Willingness to Get the COVID-19 Vaccine among Residents of Slum Settlements
Ticona, J. P. A., Nery, N., Victoriano, R., Fofana, M. O., Ribeiro, G. S., Giorgi, E., dos Reis, M. G., Ko, A. I., & Costa, F. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9090951 · Cited by 40
Vaccine hesitancy among people with multiple sclerosis
Yap, S. M., Hinai, M. A., Gaughan, M., Callanan, I., KEARNEY, H. F., Tubridy, N. J., & McGuigan, C. (2021) · Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.msard.2021.103236 · Cited by 40
Bolatov, A. K., Seisembekov, T. Z., Askarova, A. Z., & Pavalkis, D. (2021) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2021.1982280 · Cited by 40
Machida, M., Nakamura, I., Kojima, T., Saito, R., Nakaya, T., Hanibuchi, T., Takamiya, T., Odagiri, Y., Fukushima, N., Kikuchi, H., et al. (2021) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2021.1968217 · Cited by 40
Stead, M., Jessop, C., Angus, K., Bedford, H. E., USSHER, M. H., Ford, A., Eadie, D. R., MacGregor, A., Hunt, K., & MacKintosh, A. M. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055085 · Cited by 40
COVID‐19 vaccines and anti‐consumption: Understanding anti‐vaxxers hesitancy
Chaney, D., & Lee, M. (2021) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21617 · Cited by 42
A Global Survey of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Among Healthcare Workers
Noushad, M., Rastam, S., Nassani, M. Z., Al-Saqqaf, I. S., Hussain, M., Yaroko, A. A., Arshad, M., Kirfi, A. M., Koppolu, P., Niazi, F. H., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.794673 · Cited by 40
Cost-effectiveness of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination in Low- and Middle-Income Countries
Siedner, M. J., Alba, C., Fitzmaurice, K. P., Gilbert, R. F., Scott, J. A., Shebl, F. M., Ciaranello, A. L., Reddy, K. P., & Freedberg, K. A. (2022) · The Journal of Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/infdis/jiac243 · Cited by 44
Lin, F., Chen, X., & Cheng, E. W. (2022) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2022.103013 · Cited by 35
Desye, B. (2022) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.941206 · Cited by 40
Gram, M. A., Moustsen‐Helms, I. R., Valentiner‐Branth, P., & Emborg, H. (2023) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-023-15301-x · Cited by 40
Alobaidi, S. A. (2021) · Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare · doi:10.2147/jmdh.s306654 · Cited by 39
Shitu, K., Wolde, M., Handebo, S., & Kassie, A. (2021) · Tropical Medicine and Health · doi:10.1186/s41182-021-00337-9 · Cited by 39
COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Medical Students: The Next COVID-19 Challenge in Wuhan, China
Gao, X., Li, H., He, W., & Zeng, W. (2021) · Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness · doi:10.1017/dmp.2021.291 · Cited by 39
COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and rejection in an adult population in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Fojnica, A., Osmanović, A., Đuzić, N., Fejzic, A., Mekić, E., Gromilić, Z., Muhović, I., & Kurtović-Kozarić, A. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0264754 · Cited by 39
Vaccine Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers in Europe: A Systematic Review
Kaur, M., Coppeta, L., & Olesen, O. F. (2023) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines11111657 · Cited by 39
COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Patients on Dialysis in Italy and France
Blanchi, S., Torreggiani, M., Chatrenet, A., Fois, A., Mazé, B., Njandjo, L., Bianco, G., Lepori, N., Pili, A., Michel, P. A., et al. (2021) · Kidney International Reports · doi:10.1016/j.ekir.2021.08.030 · Cited by 39
Postvaccination SARS‐CoV‐2 infection among healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Chandan, S., Khan, S. R., Deliwala, S. S., Mohan, B. P., Ramai, D., Chandan, O. C., & Facciorusso, A. (2021) · Journal of Medical Virology · doi:10.1002/jmv.27457 · Cited by 40
Willingness to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2: The role of reasoning biases and conspiracist ideation
Bronstein, M. V., Kummerfeld, E., MacDonald, A. W., & Vinogradov, S. (2021) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.11.079 · Cited by 41
Taye, E. B., Taye, Z. W., Muche, H. A., Tsega, N. T., Haile, T. T., & Tiguh, A. E. (2022) · Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health · doi:10.1016/j.cegh.2022.100993 · Cited by 39
Estimating the impact of interventions against COVID-19: From lockdown to vaccination
Thompson, J., & Wattam, S. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0261330 · Cited by 43
Golan, Y., Campos, J. A. S., Woolson, R., Cilla, D., Hanabergh, R., Gonzales-Rojas, Y., Lopez, R., Finberg, R. W., & Balboni, A. (2022) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/ciac712 · Cited by 39
A national survey of potential acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines in healthcare workers in EgyptPreprint
Hussein, A. A. R. M., Galal, I., Makhlouf, N. A., Makhlouf, H. A., Elaal, H. K. A., Kholief, K. M. S., Saad, M. M., & Abdellah, D. A. (2021) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2021.01.11.21249324 · Cited by 39
Cognitive underpinnings of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy
Acar-Burkay, S., & Cristian, D. (2022) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114911 · Cited by 38
Glycyrrhizic Acid: A Natural Plant Ingredient as a Drug Candidate to Treat COVID-19
Sun, Z., He, G., Huang, N., Thilakavathy, K., Lim, J. C. W., Kumar, S. S., & Xiong, C. (2021) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2021.707205 · Cited by 39
COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Uptake among Nursing Staff during an Active Vaccine Rollout
Baniak, L. M., Luyster, F. S., Raible, C. A., McCray, E. E., & Strollo, P. J. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9080858 · Cited by 38
ElHafeez, S. A., Shaaban, R., Elbarazi, I., ElMakhzangy, R., Aly, M. O., Alnagar, A., Yacoub, M. A., Saeh, H. M. E., Eltaweel, N. A., Alqutub, S. T., et al. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0254595 · Cited by 38
Exploring the impact of COVID‐19 on mobile dating: Critical avenues for research
Gibson, A. F. (2021) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/spc3.12643 · Cited by 38
Khankeh, H. R., Farrokhi, M., Khanjani, M. S., Momtaz, Y. A., Forouzan, A. S., Norouzi, M., Ahmadi, S., Harouni, G. G., Roudini, J., Ghanaatpisheh, E., et al. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9111248 · Cited by 38
The COVID-19 vaccination experience in Bangladesh: Findings from a cross-sectional study
Islam, M. R., Hasan, M., Nasreen, W., Tushar, M. I., & Bhuiyan, M. A. (2021) · International Journal of Immunopathology and Pharmacology · doi:10.1177/20587384211065628 · Cited by 39
A model-based opinion dynamics approach to tackle vaccine hesitancy
Ancona, C., Iudice, F. L., Garofalo, F., & Lellis, P. D. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-15082-0 · Cited by 41
Vaccine Refusal Is Not Free Riding
Bradley, E., & Navin, M. C. (2021) · Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics · doi:10.23941/ejpe.v14i1.555 · Cited by 37
Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccine in Pakistan: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study
Qamar, M. A., Irfan, O., Dhillon, R. A., Bhatti, A., Sajid, M. I., Awan, S., Rizwan, W., Zubairi, A. B. S., Sarfraz, Z., & Khan, J. A. (2021) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.16603 · Cited by 37
Mir, A. A., Sevukan, R., & Gul, S. (2021) · Library Hi Tech · doi:10.1108/lht-08-2021-0261 · Cited by 37
Psychological factors underpinning vaccine willingness in Israel, Japan and Hungary
Goodwin, R. B., Ben‐Ezra, M., Takahashi, M., Luu, L. A. N., Borsfay, K., Kovács, M. E., Hou, W. K., Hamama‐Raz, Y., & Levin, Y. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-03986-2 · Cited by 39
Barceló, J., Sheen, G. C.-H., Tung, H. H., & Wu, W. (2022) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115278 · Cited by 37
Rethinking Evidence in the Time of Pandemics
Engebretsen, E., & Baker, M. (2022) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009030687 · Cited by 37
Omicron Variant of SARS-CoV-2: An Indian Perspective of Vaccination and Management
Chavda, V. P., Balar, P. C., Vaghela, D. A., Solanki, H., Vaishnav, A., Hala, V., & Vora, L. K. (2023) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines11010160 · Cited by 39
Li, X., Chen, L., Pan, Q., Liu, J., Zhang, X., Yi, J.-J., Chen, C., Luo, Q.-H., Tao, P., Pan, X., et al. (2021) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2021.1957415 · Cited by 37
Sociodemographic and Behavioral Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Pakistan
Al‐Wutayd, O., Khalil, R., & Rajar, A. B. (2021) · Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare · doi:10.2147/jmdh.s325529 · Cited by 37
Frames that matter: Increasing the willingness to get the Covid-19 vaccines
Diament, S. M., Kaya, A., & Magenheim, E. (2021) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114562 · Cited by 39
Factors influencing acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine in Malaysia: a web-based survey
Lau, J. F. W., Woon, Y. L., Leong, C. T., & Teh, H. S. (2021) · Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives · doi:10.24171/j.phrp.2021.0085 · Cited by 38
Investigating vaccine-induced immunity and its effect in mitigating SARS-CoV-2 epidemics in China
Liu, H., Zhang, J., Cai, J., Deng, X., Peng, C., Chen, X., Yang, J., Wu, Q., Chen, X., Chen, Z., et al. (2022) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-022-02243-1 · Cited by 37
Shah, J., Abeid, A. M., Sharma, K., Manji, S., Nambafu, J., Korom, R., Patel, K. A., Said, M. H., Mohamed, M. A., Sood, M., et al. (2022) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines10050705 · Cited by 37
Zhu, P., Tatar, O., Griffin-Mathieu, G., Perez, S., Haward, B., Zimet, G. D., Tunis, M. C., Dubé, È., & Rosberger, Z. (2022) · JMIR Public Health and Surveillance · doi:10.2196/37328 · Cited by 37
Osur, J. O., Chengo, R., Muinga, E., Kemboi, J., Sidibe, M., & Rarieya, M. (2022) · Archives of Public Health · doi:10.1186/s13690-022-00904-4 · Cited by 37
Last-mile delivery increases vaccine uptake in Sierra Leone
Meriggi, N. F., Voors, M., Levine, M., Ramakrishna, V., Kangbai, D. M., Rozelle, M., Tyler, E., Kallon, S., Nabieu, J., Cundy, S., et al. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07158-w · Cited by 36
Vaccine Literacy—helping Everyone Decide to Accept Vaccination
Ratzan, S. C., & Parker, R. M. (2020) · Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10810730.2021.1875083 · Cited by 36
Self-citationJiang, P., Klemeš, J. J., Fan, Y. V., Fu, X., Tan, R. R., You, S., & Foley, A. M. (2021) · Energy · doi:10.1016/j.energy.2021.121315 · Cited by 36
Attitudes Toward COVID-19 Vaccines in Chinese Adolescents
Cai, H. X., Bai, W., Liu, S., Liu, H., Xu, C., Qi, H., Liu, R., Cheung, T. C. C., Su, Z., Ng, C. H., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2021.691079 · Cited by 36
Predictive Modeling of Vaccination Uptake in US Counties: A Machine Learning–Based Approach
Cheong, Q., Au-Yeung, M., Quon, S., Concepcion, K., & Kong, J. D. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/33231 · Cited by 36
Caserotti, M., Gavaruzzi, T., Girardi, P., Tasso, A., Buizza, C., Candini, V., Zarbo, C., Chiarotti, F., Brescianini, S., Calamandrei, G., et al. (2021) · Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106885 · Cited by 38
COVID-19 Anti-Vaccine Sentiments: Analyses of Comments from Social Media
Wong, L. P., Lin, Y., Alias, H., AbuBakar, S., Zhao, Q., & Hu, Z. (2021) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare9111530 · Cited by 38
Wang, K., Wong, E. L., Cheung, A. W.-L., Yau, P. S.-Y., Chung, V. C., Wong, C. H.-L., Dong, D., Wong, S. Y. S., & Yeoh, E. (2021) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.793533 · Cited by 36
Jamieson, K. H., Romer, D., Jamieson, P. E., Winneg, K. M., & Josh Pasek, B. (2021) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2112266118 · Cited by 36
Fadhel, F. H. (2021) · Health Promotion International · doi:10.1093/heapro/daab209 · Cited by 36
Unmet need for COVID-19 vaccination coverage in Kenya
Muchiri, S. K., Muthee, R., Kiarie, H., Sitienei, J. K., Agweyu, A., Atkinson, P. M., Utazi, C. E., Tatem, A. J., & Alegana, V. A. (2022) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.02.035 · Cited by 36
Zarbo, C., Candini, V., Ferrari, C., D'Addazio, M., Calamandrei, G., Starace, F., Caserotti, M., Gavaruzzi, T., Lotto, L., Tasso, A., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.873098 · Cited by 35
Who Doesn't Want to Be Vaccinated? Determinants of Vaccine Hesitancy During COVID-19
Dabla‐Norris, E., Khan, H., Lima, F., & Sollaci, A. B. (2021) · IMF Working Paper · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4026306 · Cited by 36
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
