Incentives can spur COVID-19 vaccination uptake.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kluver H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8433545 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionAlthough vaccination is the most effective way to limit and overcome the COVID-19 pandemic, a considerable fraction of them are not intended to get vaccinated. This study aims to investigate the existing research evidence and evaluate the effectiveness and consequences of all incentives provided for increasing the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination.MethodsA systematic search in PubMed, Web of Science (WoS), and SCOPUS from 2020 until October 10, 2021, was conducted on experimental studies evaluating the effects of incentives including cash, lottery voucher, and persuasive messages on COVID-19 vaccination intention and uptake. The study selection process, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted independently by two investigators using Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT 2010) checklist.ResultsTwenty-four records were included in the qualitative analysis. Most of the included studies assessed the effect of financial incentives. In 14 studies (58%) the assessed outcome was vaccination uptake and in nine (37.5%) others it was vaccination intention. One study considered self-reported vaccination status as the outcome. This study shows that high financial incentives and the Vax-a-million lottery are attributed to a higher vaccination rate, while the low amount of financial incentives, other lotteries, and persuasive messages have small or non-significant effects.ConclusionPaying a considerable amount of cash and Vax-a-million lottery are attributed to a higher vaccination. Nevertheless, there is a controversy over the effect of other incentives including other lotteries, low amount of cash, and messages on vaccination. It is noteworthy that, inconsistency and imprecision of included studies should be considered.
| S-EPMC9492889 | biostudies-literature
Project description:High vaccination rates are integral to reducing infection and severity rates of COVID-19 infections within a community. We examine the role of social expectations in COVID-19 vaccination take-ups and its interaction with potential government actions in Malaysia. We find that individuals' expectations of others in their social groups towards vaccination predicts those individuals' vaccination registrations. Using a vignette experiment, we examine the extent of normative expectations in normalizing pro-vaccination behavior beyond an individual's reference group. We find that unless moderated by a high level of public trust, individuals prefer punitive policies as a way to increase vaccination rates in their communities.
| S-EPMC9512221 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Financial incentives are a controversial strategy for increasing vaccination. In this systematic review, we evaluated: 1) the effects of incentives on COVID-19 vaccinations; 2) whether effects differed based on study outcome, study design, incentive type and timing, or sample sociodemographic characteristics; and 3) the cost of incentives per additional vaccine administered. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Econlit up to March 2022 for terms related to COVID, vaccines, and financial incentives, and identified 38 peer-reviewed, quantitative studies. Independent raters extracted study data and evaluated study quality. Studies examined the impact of financial incentives on COVID-19 vaccine uptake (k = 18), related psychological outcomes (e.g., vaccine intentions, k = 19), or both types of outcomes. For studies of vaccine uptake, none found that financial incentives had a negative effect on uptake, and most rigorous studies found that incentives had a positive effect on uptake. By contrast, studies of vaccine intentions were inconclusive. While three studies concluded that incentives may negatively impact vaccine intentions for some individuals, they had methodological limitations. Study outcomes (uptake versus intentions) and study design (experimental versus observational frameworks) appeared to influence results more than incentive type or timing. Additionally, income and political affiliation may moderate responses to incentives. Most studies evaluating cost per additional vaccine administered found that they ranged from $49-75. Overall, fears about financial incentives decreasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake are not supported by the evidence. Financial incentives likely increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. While these increases appear to be small, they may be meaningful across populations. Registration: PROSPERO, CRD42022316086 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022316086).
| S-EPMC10163939 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10199349 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8546614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We provide evidence that material inducements for Covid-19 vaccination may backfire. Results from a hypothetical survey experiment in China (N = 1365) show incentives of 8–125 USD reduce vaccine uptake intentions compared to simply offering vaccination for free. Ours is the first Covid-19 vaccine study to separately consider and directly compare the effects of monetary and goods-based incentives, both of which have been widely employed by countries seeking to increase uptake; we demonstrate that both types backfire equally. Results are compared against the burgeoning literature on Covid-19 vaccine incentives.
| S-EPMC10270730 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 vaccination is proven to be effective and safe for older adults. This study investigated the impacts of incentives and health promotional materials provided by the government on the completion of the primary COVID-19 vaccination series among older adults in Hong Kong. Participants were Chinese-speaking community-dwelling adults aged ≥65 years. Telephone numbers were randomly selected from up-to-date Hong Kong telephone directories. A total of 440 participants completed the telephone interview. Logistic regression models were fitted. Among the participants, 58.4% had completed the primary COVID-19 vaccination series. Most participants believed that incentives provided by the government had almost no impact on increasing their motivation to receive COVID-19 vaccination, and less than half thought that vaccination promotional materials produced by the government could address their concerns and help them make decisions. After adjustment for significant background characteristics, we found perceived higher impacts of the incentives and belief that vaccination promotional materials produced by the government could address their concern and were helpful for them to make decisions to be associated with a higher rate of completion of primary COVID-19 vaccination series. Perceptions supporting COVID-19 vaccination and less decisional conflict regarding the choice of vaccine were also positively associated with the dependent variable. Government should develop incentives and health promotional materials tailored to the needs of older adults.
| S-EPMC9147504 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess reasons for noncompliance with COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers (HCWs).DesignCohort observational and surveillance study.SettingSheba Medical Center, a 1,600-bed tertiary-care medical center in Israel.ParticipantsThe study included 10,888 HCWs including all employees, students, and volunteers.InterventionThe BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was offered to all HCWs of the hospital. Noncompliance was assessed, and pre-rollout and post-rollout surveys were conducted. Data regarding uptake of the vaccine as well as demographic data and compliance with prior influenza vaccination were collected, and 2 surveys were distributed. The survey before the rollout pertained to the intention to receive the vaccine, and the survey after the rollout pertained to all unvaccinated HCWs regarding causes of hesitancy.ResultsIn the pre-rollout survey, 1,673 (47%) of 3,563 HCWs declared their intent to receive the vaccine. Overall, 8,108 (79%) HCWs received the COVID-19 vaccine within 40 days of rollout. In a multivariate logistic regression model, the factors that were significant predictors of vaccine uptake were male sex, age 40-59 years, occupation (paramedical professionals and doctors), high socioeconomic level, and compliance with flu vaccine. Among 425 unvaccinated HCWs who answered the second survey, the most common cause for hesitancy was the risk during pregnancy (31%).ConclusionsAlthough vaccine uptake among HCWs was higher than expected, relatively low uptake was observed among young women and those from lower socioeconomic levels and educational backgrounds. Concerns regarding vaccine safety during pregnancy were common and more data about vaccine safety, especially during pregnancy, might improve compliance.
| S-EPMC8503070 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Novel mRNA vaccines have been developed and were first distributed to high-risk individuals (including smokers) in the United States starting in December 2020 to combat the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Over one-half of the U.S. adult population has received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, but many others have reported hesitation about becoming vaccinated. We examined COVID-19 vaccine uptake and hesitancy from a convenience sample of Pennsylvanian adult smokers in April 2021, approximately 3 months after tobacco users were eligible to receive vaccination in the state. Participants (n = 231) were 23.4% male, 90.5% white, and had a mean age of 48.1 (SD = 11.9) years. All participants were current tobacco users, with the majority reporting current cigarette smoking (90.9%) with an average of 16 (SD = 8.1) cigarettes smoked per day. Nearly 60% (n = 137) reported receiving at least 1 dose of the vaccine and of those who did not (n = 94), 84% (n = 79) said they were somewhat or very unlikely to get a vaccine. Those who were unvaccinated were more likely to not consume news about COVID-19 (chi-square P-value < .01) and less likely to believe government news sources as reliable information for COVID-19 (chi-square P-value < .01). Qualitative responses among those who were vaccine hesitant expressed concerns about the lack of research on the vaccine, distrust of the safety of the vaccine, and fears about side effects. Understanding vaccine hesitancy among tobacco users can help develop targeted communication strategies and directly address concerns to promote vaccination among this population who may be at an increased risk of severe complications from COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8721404 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposePeople with epilepsy (PWE) are at increased risk of severe COVID-19. Assessing COVID-19 vaccine uptake is therefore important. We compared COVID-19 vaccination uptake for PWE in Wales with a matched control cohort.MethodsWe performed a retrospective, population, cohort study using linked, anonymised, Welsh electronic health records within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank (Welsh population=3.1 million).We identified PWE in Wales between 1st March 2020 and 31st December 2021 and created a control cohort using exact 5:1 matching (sex, age and socioeconomic status). We recorded 1st, 2nd and booster COVID-19 vaccinations.ResultsThere were 25,404 adults with epilepsy (127,020 controls). 23,454 (92.3%) had a first vaccination, 22,826 (89.9%) a second, and 17,797 (70.1%) a booster. Comparative figures for controls were: 112,334 (87.8%), 109,057 (85.2%) and 79,980 (62.4%).PWE had higher vaccination rates in all age, sex and socioeconomic subgroups apart from booster uptake in older subgroups. Vaccination rates were higher in older subgroups, women and less deprived areas for both cohorts. People with intellectual disability and epilepsy had higher vaccination rates when compared with controls with intellectual disability.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccination uptake for PWE in Wales was higher than that for a matched control group.
| S-EPMC10076248 | biostudies-literature