Development and validation of a questionnaire to measure attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and pandemic

  1. Petros Galanis
  2. Irene Vraka
  3. Olga Siskou
  4. Olympia Konstantakopoulou
  5. Aglaia Katsiroumpa
  6. Ioannis Moisoglou
  7. Daphne Kaitelidou

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

Accurate measurement of individuals’ attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and pandemic is critical to understand the way that people respond during a major crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective

To develop and validate a questionnaire to assess attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and pandemic.

Methods

We performed a reliability and validity study in a sample of the general population in Greece. Data were collected online through social media between 15 August and 7 September 2021. Thus, a convenience sample was obtained. Reliability and validity of the questionnaire were assessed with a Delphi study, an exploratory factor analysis, and a test-retest study. Also, we calculated Cronbach’s coefficient alpha for the factors that emerged from the exploratory factor analysis.

Results

The final study included 1959 adults from the general population in Greece. Our four-factor model explained 73% of the variance and confirmed out initial hypothesis regarding the factors of the questionnaire. In particular, we found the following four factors: (a) fear against the COVID-19 (five items), (b) information regarding the COVID-19 (two items), (c) compliance with hygiene measures (two items), and (d) trust in COVID-19 vaccination (seven items). Cronbach’s coefficients alpha for the four factors that emerged from the exploratory factor analysis were greater than 0.82. Pearson’s correlation coefficients for the 16 items and the four factors were greater than 0.67 (p-value<0.001 in all cases).

Conclusions

We developed a reliable and valid questionnaire to measure attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and pandemic. Further studies should be conducted to expand our knowledge and infer more valid results.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.09.30.21264344: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0 Armonk, NY, USA).
    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:
    Limitations: Our study had several limitations. First, our questionnaire has proven to be reliable and valid but it should be used in other populations to test further its psychometric properties since different populations may have different attitudes and cultural context. Further studies could confirm our four-factor model or could expand our findings. Second, we used a large sample of the general population in Greece but our sample was a convenience sample. Thus, further studies with more representative samples should be conducted to infer more valid results. Third, as always, creation of a questionnaire could not be exhausted in the first place. For instance, further items could be added in our questionnaire and different factors could be established.

    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.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.09.30.21264344v1 on medRxiv