The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Barriers of Influenza Vaccination Intention and Behavior – A Systematic Review of Influenza Vaccine Hesitancy, 2005 – 2016
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccine hesitancy is a significant threat to global efforts to reduce the burden of seasonal and pandemic influenza. Potential barriers of influenza vaccination need to be identified to inform interventions to raise awareness, influenza vaccine acceptance and uptake. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to (1) identify relevant studies and extract individual barriers of seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccination for risk groups and the general public; and (2) map knowledge gaps in understanding influenza vaccine hesitancy to derive directions for further research and inform interventions in this area. METHODS: Thirteen databases covering the areas of Medicine, Bioscience, Psychology, Sociology and Public Health were searched for peer-reviewed articles published between the years 2005 and 2016. Following the PRISMA approach, 470 articles were selected and analyzed for significant barriers to influenza vaccine uptake or intention. The barriers for different risk groups and flu types were clustered according to a conceptual framework based on the Theory of Planned Behavior and discussed using the 4C model of reasons for non-vaccination. RESULTS: Most studies were conducted in the American and European region. Health care personnel (HCP) and the general public were the most studied populations, while parental decisions for children at high risk were under-represented. This study also identifies understudied concepts. A lack of confidence, inconvenience, calculation and complacency were identified to different extents as barriers to influenza vaccine uptake in risk groups. CONCLUSION: Many different psychological, contextual, sociodemographic and physical barriers that are specific to certain risk groups were identified. While most sociodemographic and physical variables may be significantly related to influenza vaccine hesitancy, they cannot be used to explain its emergence or intensity. Psychological determinants were meaningfully related to uptake and should therefore be measured in a valid and comparable way. A compendium of measurements for future use is suggested as supporting information.
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
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & the PRISMA Group* (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · Cited by 37,554
Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A meta‐analytic review
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1348/014466601164939 · Cited by 9,970
Revisiting the Behavioral Model and Access to Medical Care: Does it Matter?
Andersen, R. M. (1995) · Journal of Health and Social Behavior · doi:10.2307/2137284 · Cited by 9,831
Vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants
MacDonald, N. E. (2015) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.036 · Cited by 5,573
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
Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Osterholm, M. T., Kelley, N. S., Sommer, A., & Belongia, E. A. (2012) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(11)70295-x · Cited by 1,789
Descriptive norms as an additional predictor in the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analysis
Rivis, A., & Sheeran, P. (2003) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-003-1018-2 · Cited by 1,258
Cited by
Increasing Vaccination: Putting Psychological Science Into Action
Brewer, N. T., Chapman, G. B., Rothman, A. J., Leask, J., & Kempe, A. (2017) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100618760521 · Cited by 1,233
Understanding COVID-19 vaccine demand and hesitancy: A nationwide online survey in China
Lin, Y., Hu, Z., Zhao, Q., Alias, H., Danaee, M., & Wong, L. P. (2020) · PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases · doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0008961 · Cited by 688
Sallam, M., Dababseh, D., Eid, H., Al-Mahzoum, K., Al-Haidar, A., Taim, D., Yaseen, A., Ababneh, N. A., Bakri, F. G., & Mahafzah, A. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9010042 · Cited by 675
Robinson, E., Jones, A., Lesser, I., & Daly, M. (2021) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.02.005 · Cited by 518
Palamenghi, L., Barello, S., Boccia, S., & Graffigna, G. (2020) · European Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1007/s10654-020-00675-8 · Cited by 483
Metadata
- Authors
- Schmid, P., Rauber, D., Betsch, C., Lidolt, G., & Denker, M.-L.
- Venue
- PLOS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2017-01-26
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- e0170550
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2581492029
- Cited by
- 1,228
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 11.95
- 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: Barriers of Influenza Vaccination Intention and Behavior – A Systematic Review of Influenza Vaccine Hesitancy, 2005 – 2016. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0170550
- The paper
- Schmid, P., Rauber, D., Betsch, C., Lidolt, G., & Denker, M.-L. (2017). Barriers of Influenza Vaccination Intention and Behavior – A Systematic Review of Influenza Vaccine Hesitancy, 2005 – 2016. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0170550
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.