The effect of health literacy on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among community population in China: The moderating role of stress

  1. Huiqiao Zhang
  2. Yue Li
  3. Sihui Peng
  4. Yue Jiang
  5. Huihui Jin
  6. Fan Zhang

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.2022.06.015
  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.06.16.21258808v2 on medRxiv
  3. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.16.21258808: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: Written consent form was obtained from the participants before they took part in the study.
    IRB: The survey was approved by the research ethical committee of Jinan University.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Cell Line Authenticationnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    Health literacy was measured by a 12-item health literacy questionnaire (HL-SF12[23]), derived from the European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire (HLS-EU-Q), with including 3 vaccine-related items.
    HL-SF12
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analysis: Data analysis was conducted by SPSS 21.0 and Process plug-in.
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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.

  4. Version published to 10.1101/2021.06.16.21258808v1 on medRxiv