The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Individual and social determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake
Open accessAbstract
Background: COVID-19 has had a devastating impact and efforts are being made to speed up vaccinations. The growing problem of vaccine hesitancy may affect the uptake of COVID-19 vaccine. We examined the individual, communication and social determinants associated with vaccines uptake. Methods: Data come from a nationwide online probability-based panel of 1012 representative adults in the United States and the survey was conducted before the vaccines were available. People under the federal poverty level and racial and ethnic minorities were oversampled. Our outcome variables of interest were likelihood of vaccinating self and likelihood of vaccinating people under one’s care (such as children) measuring behavioral intentions. Independent variables included perceptions of risk, exposure to different media for COVID-19 news, political party identification, confidence in scientists and social determinants of health. Logistic regression analysis was used to ascertain the effects of independent variables on the two outcome variables. Results: The results indicated that 68 and 65% agreed to get the vaccine for themselves and people under their care, respectively. Risk perceptions (severity of and susceptibility to COVID-19) were significantly associated with vaccine uptake. People who relied on “conservative” news outlets, Republicans, and who had low confidence in scientists are least likely to vaccinate self or children. Non-Hispanic Blacks and those with least schooling were also less likely to receive vaccine for themselves or people in their care. Conclusions: Our study identified race/ethnicity, risk perceptions, exposure to different media for COVID-19 news, party identification and confidence in scientists as factors that would be affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake. The good news is that these are addressable through strategic public health communications, but a lot of work remains to be done with some urgency.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Slovic, P. (1987) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.3563507 · Cited by 9,271
A postmodern Pandora's box: anti-vaccination misinformation on the internet
Kata, A. (2010) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.12.022 · Cited by 1,208
Cited by
Coccia, M. (2022) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2021.111678 · Cited by 282
The relationship between macro-socioeconomics determinants and COVID-19 vaccine distribution
Roghani, A., & Division of Epidemiology, U. O. U. S. O. M. (2021) · AIMS Public Health · doi:10.3934/publichealth.2021052 · Cited by 45
Appealing to Americans’ altruism is not enough to nudge them to accept novel vaccines
Drabo, E. F., Kelley, M. A., & Gong, C. L. (2024) · Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdae048 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Viswanath, K., Bekalu, M., Dhawan, D., Pinnamaneni, R., Lang, J., & McLoud, R.
- Venue
- BMC Public Health
- Published
- 2021-04-28
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 818-818
- ISSN
- 1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3158958041
- Cited by
- 424
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 46.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Individual and social determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s12889-021-10862-1
- The paper
- Viswanath, K., Bekalu, M., Dhawan, D., Pinnamaneni, R., Lang, J., & McLoud, R. (2021). Individual and social determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. BMC Public Health. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10862-1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.