MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139401108 · doi:10.1101/2021.03.11.21253419

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Hesitancy in Low and Middle Income Countries, and Implications for Messaging

2021· preprint· en· W3139401108 on OpenAlexaff
Julio S. Solís Arce, Shana S. Warren, Niccolò F. Meriggi, Alexandra Scacco, Nina McMurry, Maarten Voors, Georgiy Syunyaev, Amyn A. Malik, Samya Aboutajdine, Alex Armand, Saher Asad, Britta Augsburg, Antonella Bancalari, Martina Björkman Nyqvist, Ekaterina Borisova, Constantin Manuel Bosancianu, Ali Cheema, Elliott Collins, Ahsan Zia Farooqi, Mattia Fracchia, Andrea Guariso, Ali Hasanain, Anthony Kamwesigye, Sarah Kreps, Madison Levine, Rebecca Littman, Melina Platas, Vasudha Ramakrishna, Jacob N. Shapiro, Jakob Svensson, Corey Vernot, Pedro C. Vicente, Laurin Weissinger, Baobao Zhang, Dean Karlan, Michael Callen, Matthieu Teachout, Macartan Humphreys, Saad B. Omer, Ahmed Mushfiq Mobarak

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)International Development Research Centre
FundersNational Research University Higher School of EconomicsUK Research and InnovationUniversiteit GentBill and Melinda Gates FoundationInternational Growth CentreLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceNew York University Abu DhabiPrinceton University
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)VaccinationLow and middle income countriesBusinessImmunizationPandemicDeveloping countryEnvironmental healthMedicineEconomic growthVirologyEconomicsImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We analyze COVID-19 vaccine acceptance across 15 survey samples covering ten low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Asia, Africa, and South America, Russia (an upper-middle-income country), and the United States, using survey responses from 44,260 individuals. We find considerably higher willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine in LMIC samples (80% on average) compared to the United States (65%) and Russia (30%). Vaccine acceptance was primarily explained by an interest in personal protection against COVID-19, while concern about side effects was the most commonly expressed reason for reluctance. Health workers were the most trusted sources of information about COVID-19 vaccines. Our findings suggest that prioritizing vaccine distribution to LMICs should yield high returns in promoting global immunization coverage, and that vaccination campaigns in these countries should focus on translating acceptance into uptake. Messaging highlighting vaccine efficacy and safety, delivered by healthcare workers, may be most effective in addressing remaining hesitancy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations78
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207