Understanding COVID-19 vaccine demand and hesitancy: A nationwide online survey in China.
Journal
PLoS neglected tropical diseases
ISSN: 1935-2735
Titre abrégé: PLoS Negl Trop Dis
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101291488
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2020
12 2020
Historique:
received:
15
06
2020
accepted:
06
11
2020
revised:
31
12
2020
pubmed:
18
12
2020
medline:
14
1
2021
entrez:
17
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This study attempts to understand coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine demand and hesitancy by assessing the public's vaccination intention and willingness-to-pay (WTP). Confidence in COVID-19 vaccines produced in China and preference for domestically-made or foreign-made vaccines was also investigated. A nationwide cross-sectional, self-administered online survey was conducted on 1-19 May 2020. The health belief model (HBM) was used as a theoretical framework for understanding COVID-19 vaccination intent and WTP. A total of 3,541 complete responses were received. The majority reported a probably yes intent (54.6%), followed by a definite yes intent (28.7%). The perception that vaccination decreases the chances of getting COVID-19 under the perceived benefit construct (OR = 3.14, 95% CI 2.05-4.83) and not being concerned about the efficacy of new COVID-19 vaccines under the perceived barriers construct (OR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.31-2.09) were found to have the highest significant odds of a definite intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) of WTP for COVID-19 vaccine was CNY¥200/US$28 (IQR CNY¥100-500/USD$14-72). The highest marginal WTP for the vaccine was influenced by socio-economic factors. The majority were confident (48.7%) and completely confident (46.1%) in domestically-made COVID-19 vaccine. 64.2% reported a preference for a domestically-made over foreign-made COVID-19 vaccine. The findings demonstrate the utility of HBM constructs in understanding COVID-19 vaccination intent and WTP. It is important to improve health promotion and reduce the barriers to COVID-19 vaccination.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
This study attempts to understand coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine demand and hesitancy by assessing the public's vaccination intention and willingness-to-pay (WTP). Confidence in COVID-19 vaccines produced in China and preference for domestically-made or foreign-made vaccines was also investigated.
METHODS
A nationwide cross-sectional, self-administered online survey was conducted on 1-19 May 2020. The health belief model (HBM) was used as a theoretical framework for understanding COVID-19 vaccination intent and WTP.
RESULTS
A total of 3,541 complete responses were received. The majority reported a probably yes intent (54.6%), followed by a definite yes intent (28.7%). The perception that vaccination decreases the chances of getting COVID-19 under the perceived benefit construct (OR = 3.14, 95% CI 2.05-4.83) and not being concerned about the efficacy of new COVID-19 vaccines under the perceived barriers construct (OR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.31-2.09) were found to have the highest significant odds of a definite intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) of WTP for COVID-19 vaccine was CNY¥200/US$28 (IQR CNY¥100-500/USD$14-72). The highest marginal WTP for the vaccine was influenced by socio-economic factors. The majority were confident (48.7%) and completely confident (46.1%) in domestically-made COVID-19 vaccine. 64.2% reported a preference for a domestically-made over foreign-made COVID-19 vaccine.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings demonstrate the utility of HBM constructs in understanding COVID-19 vaccination intent and WTP. It is important to improve health promotion and reduce the barriers to COVID-19 vaccination.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33332359
doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008961
pii: PNTD-D-20-01053
pmc: PMC7775119
doi:
Substances chimiques
COVID-19 Vaccines
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0008961Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Health Psychol. 2007 Mar;26(2):136-45
pubmed: 17385964
J Health Soc Behav. 1977 Dec;18(4):348-66
pubmed: 617639
EClinicalMedicine. 2020 Sep;26:100495
pubmed: 32838242
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2010 Mar;7(3):853-69
pubmed: 20617008
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2020 Jul 2;16(7):1611-1622
pubmed: 32429731
J Med Internet Res. 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34
pubmed: 15471760
Vaccines (Basel). 2019 Aug 23;7(3):
pubmed: 31450855
Biologicals. 2019 Sep;61:95-96
pubmed: 31477496
Nihon Koshu Eisei Zasshi. 2010 May;57(5):381-9
pubmed: 20666124
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 May 13;111(19):6928-33
pubmed: 24778237
Clin Infect Dis. 2002 Aug 1;35(3):294-7
pubmed: 12115095
BMC Public Health. 2019 Nov 27;19(1):1564
pubmed: 31771543
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2020 Sep 1;16(9):2204-2214
pubmed: 32730103
J R Soc Interface. 2016 Dec;13(125):
pubmed: 28003528
Vaccine. 2019 Aug 23;37(36):5270-5275
pubmed: 31345640
Vaccines (Basel). 2019 Dec 20;8(1):
pubmed: 31861816
Innov Pharm. 2012;3(2):1-11
pubmed: 22844651
Lancet. 2020 Jun 6;395(10239):1751-1752
pubmed: 32505245
BMC Infect Dis. 2018 Oct 4;18(1):502
pubmed: 30286735
Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Apr 15;147(8):783-90
pubmed: 9554420
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 26;12(1):e0170550
pubmed: 28125629
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000 Jul-Aug;7(4):426-9
pubmed: 10887170