Factors associated with decision making on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among college students in South Carolina

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.03.20243543: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: An online informed consent was presented to the participants before they began the survey.
    IRB: The research protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board at University of South Carolina.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variableMeasures Demographics: Participants were asked to provide their demographic information including gender (0 = female, 1 = male), age (years), annual family income (from < $10,000 to ≥ $100,000), race/ethnicity (e.g., White/Caucasian, Black/Africa American), and school year (i.e., Freshman, Sophomore, Junior, Senior, first or second year in their master or doctoral program).

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Data were collected using RedCap, a web-based survey platform which has been widely used in public health studies (Paris & Hynes, 2019).
    RedCap
    suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)
    All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software version 26.
    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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    There are several methodological limitations in the current study. First, data were collected from a convenience sample of college students in South Carolina. Findings in the current study may not be generalized to students in other states. Second, self-report data may be subject to response bias, such as social desirability. Third, cross-sectional data cannot draw causal inferences. Fourth, measures on factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination decision making were self-developed and have not been validated. Future research should use a random sample, apply a longitudinal design, and validate self-developed measures. Despite these limitations, the current study is one of the first attempts to explore COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among college students in the South. We identified an acceptance rate of 60.6%, which is lower than that in general population and merits a public health attention since young adults have comparable risk of COVID-19 with other age groups. Our findings show factors associated with vaccination decision making were weighed differently by college students with different vaccine acceptance levels, which may have important implications to public health practices. Acceptance-enhancing interventions or vaccine communications in colleges could benefit from tailoring contents to the patterns of decision making. College leaders and healthcare providers need to be aware of their important role in promoting COVID-19 vaccination. The success of vaccination may st...

    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.

    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.