Trends, patterns and psychological influences on COVID-19 vaccination intention: Findings from a large prospective community cohort study in England and Wales (Virus Watch)

  1. Thomas Byrne
  2. Parth Patel
  3. Madhumita Shrotri
  4. Sarah Beale
  5. Susan Michie
  6. Jabeer Butt
  7. Nicky Hawkins
  8. Pia Hardelid
  9. Alison Rodger
  10. Anna Aryee
  11. Isobel Braithwaite
  12. Wing Lam Erica Fong
  13. Ellen Fragaszy
  14. Cyril Geismar
  15. Jana Kovar
  16. Annalan M.D. Navaratnam
  17. Vincent Nguyen
  18. Andrew Hayward
  19. Robert W Aldridge
  20. Linda Wijlaar
  21. Eleni Nastouli
  22. Moira Spyer
  23. Ben Killingley
  24. Ingemar Cox
  25. Vasileios Lampos
  26. Rachel A. McKendry
  27. Tao Cheng
  28. Yunzhe Liu
  29. Anne M. Johnson
  30. Jo Gibbs
  31. Richard Gilson

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.09.066
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.22.21254130: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    18 Data collection using online REDCap surveys began on 24 June 2020 and is ongoing.
    REDCap
    suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)
    Statistical analysis: Baseline and monthly survey response data were extracted from REDCap, linked, and analysed in Stata (version 16.0, StataCorp).
    StataCorp
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Another important limitation is that only households with a lead householder able to speak English were able to take part in the study and that all participants must have access to the internet. Guided by the advice from our community advisory board, the study surveys have since been translated into 9 languages to allow non-English speakers to participate. The increase in intention to accept a COVID-19 vaccine when offered observed in this study is encouraging. It is possible that public health communications to promote vaccination uptake have contributed to this shift; it is also possible that growing numbers of people being vaccinated during the period of this study has contributed to the change in intention. It is particularly encouraging that the intention to accept a COVID-19 vaccine has increased consistently across ethnic and social groups. Our findings show the importance of making repeated offers of a COVID-19 vaccine because many people have changed their mind over the course of a few months. Our findings also suggest that communications focussing on COVID-19 vaccine safety and effectiveness may be more effective than those focussing on COVID-19 illness risk and perception. Disparities in vaccination coverage should not be conflated with disparities in vaccination intention. If differences in vaccination coverage persist between ethnic groups and areas of social deprivation, our findings suggest they may not be fully explained by differences in vaccination intention...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.03.22.21254130v1 on medRxiv