Zobraziť v EDS

Infographics on risks associated with COVID-19 and the willingness to get the AstraZeneca vaccine: two randomized online experiments

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Názov: Infographics on risks associated with COVID-19 and the willingness to get the AstraZeneca vaccine: two randomized online experiments
Autori: Felgendreff, Lisa, Siegers, Regina, Otten, Leonie, Betsch, Cornelia
Zdroj: BMC Public Health
BMC Public Health, Vol 24, Iss 1, Pp 1-14 (2024)
Informácie o vydavateľovi: Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2024.
Rok vydania: 2024
Predmety: Risk perception, European People, Research, Data Visualization, Vaccination, COVID-19, Confidence, Thrombosis, Intention, Risk communication, 3. Good health, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/administration, Vaccination/psychology [MeSH], Humans [MeSH], Pandemics [MeSH], COVID-19/prevention, Data Visualization [MeSH], European People [MeSH], Thrombosis/chemically induced [MeSH], Intention [MeSH], Decision-making, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, Humans, Public aspects of medicine, RA1-1270, Pandemics
Popis: Background Germans hesitated to get vaccinated with AstraZeneca in the COVID-19 pandemic after reports of blood clots. Methods In two preregistered online experiments with stratified randomization (Study 1 N = 824, Study 2: N = 1,056), we tested whether providing evidence-based benefit-risk information reduces the perceived risk of the AstraZeneca vaccine and the perceived probability of blood clots due to the AstraZeneca vaccine and increases the vaccination intention. In Study 1, participants saw no infographic (control) or one of two infographics (low vs. high exposure risk varied by the underlying incidence rates). Study 2 additionally varied the infographic design displaying the risk information (presented as table, circle icons, or manikin-like icons). Results The infographic decreased the risk perception of the vaccine compared to no infographic (Study 1: Cohens d = 0.31, 95% CI [0.14, 0.48]; Study 2: Cohens d = 0.34, 95% CI [0.06, 0.62]), but it did not influence the perceived probability of blood clots due to the AstraZeneca vaccine (Study 2: Cohens d = 0.05, 95% CI [-0.23, 0.33]). Also, the infographic design did not affect the perceived probability of blood clots (Study 2). The vaccination intention was not affected by viewing the infographic (Study 1: Cohens d = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.13, 0.21]; Study 2: Cohens d = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.24, 0.32]) nor the presented infection rate (Study 1: Cohens d = 0.07, 95% CI [-0.09, 0.24], Study 2: Cohens d = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.12, 0.15]) but by risk perceptions, sociodemographic characteristics, confidence in the AstraZeneca vaccine, and preference for alternative vaccines. Conclusions The evidence-based benefit-risk information helped putting the risk of vaccinations into perspective. Nevertheless, objective risk information alone did not affect vaccination intention that was low due to the preexisting lacking vaccine confidence.
Druh dokumentu: Article
Other literature type
Jazyk: English
ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-18057-0
Prístupová URL adresa: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38378506
https://doaj.org/article/32e8c063fe344c25a6ef610c7dec3a0f
https://repository.publisso.de/resource/frl:6507696
Rights: CC BY
URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Prístupové číslo: edsair.doi.dedup.....feb7e14c9c29e897edab6663302d41b0
Databáza: OpenAIRE
Popis
Abstrakt:Background Germans hesitated to get vaccinated with AstraZeneca in the COVID-19 pandemic after reports of blood clots. Methods In two preregistered online experiments with stratified randomization (Study 1 N = 824, Study 2: N = 1,056), we tested whether providing evidence-based benefit-risk information reduces the perceived risk of the AstraZeneca vaccine and the perceived probability of blood clots due to the AstraZeneca vaccine and increases the vaccination intention. In Study 1, participants saw no infographic (control) or one of two infographics (low vs. high exposure risk varied by the underlying incidence rates). Study 2 additionally varied the infographic design displaying the risk information (presented as table, circle icons, or manikin-like icons). Results The infographic decreased the risk perception of the vaccine compared to no infographic (Study 1: Cohens d = 0.31, 95% CI [0.14, 0.48]; Study 2: Cohens d = 0.34, 95% CI [0.06, 0.62]), but it did not influence the perceived probability of blood clots due to the AstraZeneca vaccine (Study 2: Cohens d = 0.05, 95% CI [-0.23, 0.33]). Also, the infographic design did not affect the perceived probability of blood clots (Study 2). The vaccination intention was not affected by viewing the infographic (Study 1: Cohens d = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.13, 0.21]; Study 2: Cohens d = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.24, 0.32]) nor the presented infection rate (Study 1: Cohens d = 0.07, 95% CI [-0.09, 0.24], Study 2: Cohens d = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.12, 0.15]) but by risk perceptions, sociodemographic characteristics, confidence in the AstraZeneca vaccine, and preference for alternative vaccines. Conclusions The evidence-based benefit-risk information helped putting the risk of vaccinations into perspective. Nevertheless, objective risk information alone did not affect vaccination intention that was low due to the preexisting lacking vaccine confidence.
ISSN:14712458
DOI:10.1186/s12889-024-18057-0