The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance: Correlates in a nationally representative longitudinal survey of the Australian population
Open accessAbstract
Background: High levels of vaccination coverage in populations will be required even with vaccines that have high levels of effectiveness to prevent and stop outbreaks of coronavirus. The World Health Organisation has suggested that governments take a proactive response to vaccine hesitancy ‘hotspots’ based on social and behavioural insights. Methods: Representative longitudinal online survey of over 3000 adults from Australia that examines the demographic, attitudinal, political and social attitudes and COVID-19 health behavior correlates of vaccine hesitance and resistance to a COVID-19 vaccine. Results: Overall, 59% would definitely get the vaccine, 29% had low levels of hesitancy, 7% had high levels of hesitancy and 6% were resistant. Females, those living in disadvantaged areas, those who reported that risks of COVID-19 was overstated, those who had more populist views and higher levels of religiosity were more likely to be hesitant or resistant while those who had higher levels of household income, those who had higher levels of social distancing, who downloaded the COVID-Safe App, who had more confidence in their state or territory government or confidence in their hospitals, or were more supportive of migration were more likely to intend to get vaccinated. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that vaccine hesitancy, which accounts for a significant proportion of the population can be addressed by public health messaging but for a significant minority of the population with strongly held beliefs, alternative policy measures may well be needed to achieve sufficient vaccination coverage to end the pandemic.
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
A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker)
Hale, T., Angrist, N., Goldszmidt, R., Kira, B., Petherick, A., Phillips, T., Webster, S., Cameron-Blake, E., Hallas, L., Majumdar, S., et al. (2021) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01079-8 · Cited by 4,578
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
High Contagiousness and Rapid Spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2
Sanche, S., Lin, Y. T., Xu, C., Romero-Severson, E., Hengartner, N., & Ke, R. (2020) · Emerging Infectious Diseases · doi:10.3201/eid2607.200282 · Cited by 1,619
Murphy, J., Vallières, F., Bentall, R. P., Shevlin, M., McBride, O., Hartman, T. K., McKay, R., Bennett, K., Mason, L., Gibson-Miller, J., et al. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-20226-9 · Cited by 1,283
Herd Immunity: Understanding COVID-19
Randolph, H. E., & Barreiro, L. B. (2020) · Immunity · doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2020.04.012 · Cited by 1,138
Reiter, P. L., Pennell, M. L., & Katz, M. L. (2020) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.08.043 · Cited by 1,103
Once we have it, will we use it? A European survey on willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19
Neumann-Böhme, S., Varghese, N. E., Sabat, I., Barros, P. P., Brouwer, W., van Exel, J., Schreyögg, J., & Stargardt, T. (2020) · The European Journal of Health Economics · doi:10.1007/s10198-020-01208-6 · Cited by 1,011
Vaccine hesitancy, vaccine refusal and the anti-vaccine movement: influence, impact and implications
Dubé, E., Vivion, M., & MacDonald, N. E. (2015) · Expert Review of Vaccines · doi:10.1586/14760584.2015.964212 · Cited by 986
Sherman, S. M., Smith, L. E., Sim, J., Amlôt, R., Cutts, M., Dasch, H., Rubin, G. J., & Sevdalis, N. (2021) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2020.1846397 · Cited by 758
Bartsch, S. M., O'Shea, K. J., Ferguson, M. C., Bottazzi, M. E., Wedlock, P. T., Strych, U., McKinnell, J. A., Siegmund, S. S., Cox, S. N., Hotez, P. J., et al. (2020) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2020.06.011 · Cited by 324
Cited by
Vaccine Hesitancy: Contemporary Issues and Historical Background
Nuwarda, R. F., Ramzan, I., Weekes, L., & Kayser, V. (2022) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines10101595 · Cited by 282
Lavoie, K., Gosselin-Boucher, V., Stojanovic, J., Gupta, S., Gagné, M., Joyal-Desmarais, K., Séguin, K., Gorin, S. S., Ribeiro, P., Voisard, B., et al. (2022) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059411 · Cited by 59
Samannodi, M. (2021) · Patient Preference and Adherence · doi:10.2147/ppa.s338932 · Cited by 31
Media use and vaccine resistance
Green, J., Druckman, J. N., Baum, M. A., Ognyanova, K., Simonson, M. D., Perlis, R. H., & Lazer, D. (2023) · PNAS Nexus · doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad146 · Cited by 25
Parthasarathi, A., Puvvada, R. K., Basappa, S., Krishna, M. T., & P A, M. (2022) · Wellcome Open Research · doi:10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17517.1 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Edwards, B., Biddle, N., Gray, M., & Sollis, K.
- Venue
- PLOS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2021-03-24
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- e0248892
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3137606497
- Cited by
- 339
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 42.20
- 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: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance: Correlates in a nationally representative longitudinal survey of the Australian population. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0248892
- The paper
- Edwards, B., Biddle, N., Gray, M., & Sollis, K. (2021). COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance: Correlates in a nationally representative longitudinal survey of the Australian population. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248892
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.
