EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

The path towards herd immunity: Predicting COVID-19 vaccination uptake through results from a stated choice study across six continents

Stephane Hess, Emily Lancsar (), Petr Mariel, Jürgen Meyerhoff, Fangqing Song, Eline van den Broek-Altenburg, Olufunke A. Alaba, Gloria Amaris, Julián Arellana, Leonardo J. Basso, Jamie Benson, Luis Bravo-Moncayo, Olivier Chanel, Syngjoo Choi (), Romain Crastes dit Sourd, Helena Bettella Cybis, Zack Dorner (), Paolo Falco, Luis Garzón-Pérez, Kathryn Glass, Luis A. Guzman, Zhiran Huang, Elisabeth Huynh, Bongseop Kim, Abisai Konstantinus, Iyaloo Konstantinus, Ana Margarita Larranaga, Alberto Longo, Becky P.Y. Loo, Malte Oehlmann, Vikki O'Neill, Juan de Dios Ortúzar, María José Sanz, Olga L. Sarmiento, Hazvinei Tamuka Moyo, Steven Tucker (), Yacan Wang, Yu Wang, Edward J.D. Webb, Junyi Zhang and Mark H.P. Zuidgeest

Social Science & Medicine, 2022, vol. 298, issue C

Abstract: Despite unprecedented progress in developing COVID-19 vaccines, global vaccination levels needed to reach herd immunity remain a distant target, while new variants keep emerging. Obtaining near universal vaccine uptake relies on understanding and addressing vaccine resistance. Simple questions about vaccine acceptance however ignore that the vaccines being offered vary across countries and even population subgroups, and differ in terms of efficacy and side effects. By using advanced discrete choice models estimated on stated choice data collected in 18 countries/territories across six continents, we show a substantial influence of vaccine characteristics. Uptake increases if more efficacious vaccines (95% vs 60%) are offered (mean across study areas = 3.9%, range of 0.6%–8.1%) or if vaccines offer at least 12 months of protection (mean across study areas = 2.4%, range of 0.2%–5.8%), while an increase in severe side effects (from 0.001% to 0.01%) leads to reduced uptake (mean = −1.3%, range of −0.2% to −3.9%). Additionally, a large share of individuals (mean = 55.2%, range of 28%–75.8%) would delay vaccination by 3 months to obtain a more efficacious (95% vs 60%) vaccine, where this increases further if the low efficacy vaccine has a higher risk (0.01% instead of 0.001%) of severe side effects (mean = 65.9%, range of 41.4%–86.5%). Our work highlights that careful consideration of which vaccines to offer can be beneficial. In support of this, we provide an interactive tool to predict uptake in a country as a function of the vaccines being deployed, and also depending on the levels of infectiousness and severity of circulating variants of COVID-19.

Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795362200106X
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:socmed:v:298:y:2022:i:c:s027795362200106x

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
http://www.elsevier. ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114800

Access Statistics for this article

Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian

More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().

 
Page updated 2022-08-08
Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:298:y:2022:i:c:s027795362200106x