Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34415928›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Preferences for COVID-19 vaccine distribution strategies in the US: A discrete choice survey.

Ingrid Eshun-Wilson, Aaloke Mody, Khai Hoan Tram, Cory Bradley, Alexander Sheve, Branson Fox, Vetta Thompson, Elvin H Geng

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Which factors drive the choice of the French-speaking Quebec population towards a COVID-19 vaccination programme: A discrete-choice experiment.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ingrid Eshun-WilsonSchool of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4049-9868
Aaloke ModySchool of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3787-365X
Khai Hoan TramSchool of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1129-7674
Cory BradleyBrown School at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Alexander SheveSchool of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Branson FoxSchool of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Vetta ThompsonBrown School at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Elvin H GengSchool of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Washington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences (KL2) KL2TR002346 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Dominic N Reeds · 2017 to 2026
$14.0M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR002346
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 vaccination campaign in the US has been immensely successful in vaccinating those who are receptive, further increases in vaccination rates however will require more innovative approaches to reach those who remain hesitant. Developing vaccination strategies that are modelled on what people want could further increase uptake. METHODS AND

findingsTo inform COVID-19 vaccine distribution strategies that are aligned with public preferences we conducted a discrete choice experiment among the US public (N = 2,895) between March 15 to March 22, 2021. We applied sampling weights, evaluated mean preferences using mixed logit models, and identified latent class preference subgroups. On average, the public prioritized ease, preferring single to two dose vaccinations (mean preference: -0.29; 95%CI: -0.37 to -0.20), vaccinating once rather than annually (mean preference: -0.79; 95%CI: -0.89 to -0.70) and reducing waiting times at vaccination sites. Vaccine enforcement reduced overall vaccine acceptance (mean preference -0.20; 95%CI: -0.30 to -0.10), with a trend of increasing resistance to enforcement with increasing vaccine hesitancy. Latent class analysis identified four distinct preference phenotypes: the first prioritized inherent "vaccine features" (46.1%), the second were concerned about vaccine "service delivery" (8.8%), a third group desired "social proof" of vaccine safety and were susceptible to enforcement (13.2%), and the fourth group were "indifferent" to vaccine and service delivery features and resisted enforcement (31.9%).

conclusionsThis study identifies several critical insights for the COVID-19 public health response. First, identifying preference segments is essential to ensure that vaccination services meet the needs of diverse population subgroups. Second, making vaccination easy and promoting autonomy by simplifying services and offering the public choices (where feasible) may increase uptake in those who remain deliberative. And, third vaccine mandates have the potential to increase vaccination rates in susceptible groups but may simultaneously promote control aversion and resistance in those who are most hesitant.

Indexed as

COVID-19 VaccinesAdultBlack or African AmericanConsumer BehaviorFemaleHumansImmunization ProgramsMaleMiddle AgedPoliticsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesVaccination CoverageVaccination RefusalCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID34415928
PMCPMC8378751
OpenAlexW3194358437

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.