Cited by 7Vaccine Coverage and HesitancySARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchCOVID-19 and Mental Health

Global intention of the general public to undergo COVID-19 vaccination: time trends and risk factors for vaccine refusal, a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Open access
Parthasarathi, Ashwaghosha, Puvvada, Rahul Krishna, Basappa, S, Krishna, Mamidipudi Thirumala, P A, Mahesh·2022·Wellcome Open Research

Abstract

Background: Knowledge of facilitators and barriers regarding the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination at a global population level is critical for combating the pandemic, saving lives, and protecting the economy. The aim of this work was to determine the proportion of people likely to accept or refuse to undergo COVID-19 vaccination. This study also investigated (a) time trends regarding the intention to undergo COVID-19 vaccination and (b) socio-demographic risk factors influencing vaccine refusal. Methods: Databases (01 March 2020-01 March 2021) searched included PubMed, MEDLINE, and Scopus. The sample size was n ≥1000 and selected studies were those that determined vaccine ‘acceptance’, ‘refusal’ and ‘hesitancy’. A random-effects model was employed to obtain the overall odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for socio-demographic predictors for vaccine refusal. Results: A total of 832 citations were screened and 35 studies from 21 countries (n=130,179) were analyzed. The pooled proportion of individuals reporting an intention to vaccinate was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.65 to 0.74; I 2 = 99.68%). The proportion of people intending to vaccinate decreased (regression coefficient = -0.13; p<0.001) during the study period and odds of refusal to vaccinate increased by 1.37-fold (95% CI: 1.33-1.41) during the second half. Risk factors identified for vaccine refusal included being female, rural residence, lower income, and lower level of formal education. Conclusions: A moderate proportion of people showed an intention to receive vaccination, although this declined during the study period. A global and national multi-pronged strategic and targeted approach is urgently needed to enhance vaccination uptake amongst females, those with a relatively lower educational and socioeconomic status, and those in rural areas.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17517.1

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Parthasarathi, A., Puvvada, R. K., Basappa, S., Krishna, M. T., & P A, M.
Affiliations
  • La Trobe University (AU)
  • University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Venue
Wellcome Open Research
Published
2022-01-19
Volume
7
Pages
17
ISSN
2398-502X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4205274164
Cited by
7
References
55
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4
FWCI
0.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Wellcome Open Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
The Wellcome Trust DBT India Alliance ([IA/TSG/19/1/600026])
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
Keywords
COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine acceptance, vaccine refusal, vaccine hesitancy, vaccination intention, temporal trends, sociodemographic risk factors, gender differences, rural residence, socioeconomic status, educational attainment

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