Social network risk factors and COVID-19 vaccination: A cross-sectional survey study
•We surveyed 2,712 people in Canada following COVID-19 vaccine mandates in 2021.•Perceiving COVID-19 as less serious predicted reporting a mostly unvaccinated social circle.•Risk perception was a more powerful predictor than sociodemographic variables.•Risk perception may be a key indicator of socia...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Vaccine 2024-02, Vol.42 (4), p.891-911 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 911 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 891 |
container_title | Vaccine |
container_volume | 42 |
creator | Memedovich, Ally Orr, Taylor Hollis, Aidan Salmon, Charleen Hu, Jia Zinszer, Kate Williamson, Tyler Beall, Reed F. |
description | •We surveyed 2,712 people in Canada following COVID-19 vaccine mandates in 2021.•Perceiving COVID-19 as less serious predicted reporting a mostly unvaccinated social circle.•Risk perception was a more powerful predictor than sociodemographic variables.•Risk perception may be a key indicator of social networks with lower intervention uptake.•Identifying high risk social circles has utility for outreach design and health system readiness.
Social networks have an important impact on our health behaviours, including vaccination. People’s vaccination beliefs tend to mirror those of their social network. As social networks are homogenous in many ways, we sought to determine in the context of COVID-19 which factors were most predictive of belonging to a mostly vaccinated or unvaccinated social group.
We conducted a cross-sectional survey among Canadian residents in November and December 2021. Participants were asked about the vaccination status of their social networks their beliefs relating to COVID-19, and various sociodemographic factors. Respondents were split into three groups based on social network vaccination: low-, medium-, and high-risk. Chi-squared tests tested associations between factors and risk groups, and an ordinal logistic model was created to determine their direction and strength.
Most respondents (81.1 %) were classified as low risk (i.e., a mostly vaccinated social network) and few respondents (3.7 %) were classified as high-risk (i.e., an unvaccinated social group). Both the chi-square test (29.2 % difference between the low- and high- risk groups [1.8 % vs. 31.0 %], p |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.01.012 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2924998985</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0264410X24000057</els_id><sourcerecordid>2922965715</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-5c0b31b9b99dc48bf2287784d98473f6dabd4f4d331d8f9412253e8f3b34515b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1rGzEQhkVoaBynPyFF0Esv62j04ZV6KcFNWkMgh3yQm9BKWpA_Vq606-J_Hzl2e-glMDAwPPOO9CB0CWQCBKZXi8nWWBs6P6GE8gmBUvQEjUDWrKIC5Ac0InTKKw7k5Qyd57wghAgG6iM6Y5IyCcBH6PEh2mBWuPP9n5iWOIW8xK2xfUwZm87h2f3z_EcFCh_OmT7E7hu-xjbFnKvs7X5QAvKQtn6Hcz-43QU6bc0q-0_HPkZPtzePs1_V3f3P-ez6rrJMyr4SljQMGtUo5SyXTUuprGvJnZK8Zu3UmcbxljvGwMlWcaBUMC9b1jAuQDRsjL4ecjcp_h587vU6ZOtXK9P5OGRNFeVKSSVFQb_8hy7ikMrD3yiqpqKGPSUO1Nvvkm_1JoW1STsNRO-164U-atd77ZpAKVr2Ph_Th2bt3b-tv54L8P0A-KJjG3zS2QbfWe9CKgq1i-GdE68x7pRt</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2922965715</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Social network risk factors and COVID-19 vaccination: A cross-sectional survey study</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><creator>Memedovich, Ally ; Orr, Taylor ; Hollis, Aidan ; Salmon, Charleen ; Hu, Jia ; Zinszer, Kate ; Williamson, Tyler ; Beall, Reed F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Memedovich, Ally ; Orr, Taylor ; Hollis, Aidan ; Salmon, Charleen ; Hu, Jia ; Zinszer, Kate ; Williamson, Tyler ; Beall, Reed F.</creatorcontrib><description>•We surveyed 2,712 people in Canada following COVID-19 vaccine mandates in 2021.•Perceiving COVID-19 as less serious predicted reporting a mostly unvaccinated social circle.•Risk perception was a more powerful predictor than sociodemographic variables.•Risk perception may be a key indicator of social networks with lower intervention uptake.•Identifying high risk social circles has utility for outreach design and health system readiness.
Social networks have an important impact on our health behaviours, including vaccination. People’s vaccination beliefs tend to mirror those of their social network. As social networks are homogenous in many ways, we sought to determine in the context of COVID-19 which factors were most predictive of belonging to a mostly vaccinated or unvaccinated social group.
We conducted a cross-sectional survey among Canadian residents in November and December 2021. Participants were asked about the vaccination status of their social networks their beliefs relating to COVID-19, and various sociodemographic factors. Respondents were split into three groups based on social network vaccination: low-, medium-, and high-risk. Chi-squared tests tested associations between factors and risk groups, and an ordinal logistic model was created to determine their direction and strength.
Most respondents (81.1 %) were classified as low risk (i.e., a mostly vaccinated social network) and few respondents (3.7 %) were classified as high-risk (i.e., an unvaccinated social group). Both the chi-square test (29.2 % difference between the low- and high- risk groups [1.8 % vs. 31.0 %], p < 0.001) and the ordinal logistic model (odds ratio between the low- and high-risk groups: 14.45, p < 0.01) found that respondents’ perceptions of COVID-19 as a “not at all serious” risk to Canadians was the most powerful predictor of belonging to a predominantly unvaccinated social circle. The model also found that those in mostly unvaccinated social circles also more often reported severe COVID-19 symptoms (odds ratio between the low- and high-risk groups: 2.26, p < 0.05).
Perception of COVID-19 as a threat to others may signal communities with lower vaccination coverage and higher risk of severe outcomes. This may have implications for strategies to improve public outreach, messaging, and planning for downstream consequences of low intervention uptake.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0264-410X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2518</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.01.012</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38238114</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Chi-square test ; COVID-19 ; COVID-19 vaccines ; Ethnicity ; Health behavior ; Health behaviours ; Immunization ; Polls & surveys ; Public opinions ; Questionnaires ; Risk factors ; Risk groups ; Rural areas ; SARS-CoV-2 ; Social interactions ; Social networks ; Social organization ; Sociodemographics ; Surveys ; Vaccination ; Vaccination / psychology</subject><ispartof>Vaccine, 2024-02, Vol.42 (4), p.891-911</ispartof><rights>2024 The Author(s)</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2024. The Author(s)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-5c0b31b9b99dc48bf2287784d98473f6dabd4f4d331d8f9412253e8f3b34515b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3193-8088 ; 0000-0001-5029-2345 ; 0000-0001-8188-7616 ; 0000-0002-6548-3985 ; 0000-0001-5125-2193 ; 0000-0002-1294-731X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2922965715?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995,64385,64387,64389,72469</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38238114$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Memedovich, Ally</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orr, Taylor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hollis, Aidan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salmon, Charleen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hu, Jia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zinszer, Kate</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williamson, Tyler</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beall, Reed F.</creatorcontrib><title>Social network risk factors and COVID-19 vaccination: A cross-sectional survey study</title><title>Vaccine</title><addtitle>Vaccine</addtitle><description>•We surveyed 2,712 people in Canada following COVID-19 vaccine mandates in 2021.•Perceiving COVID-19 as less serious predicted reporting a mostly unvaccinated social circle.•Risk perception was a more powerful predictor than sociodemographic variables.•Risk perception may be a key indicator of social networks with lower intervention uptake.•Identifying high risk social circles has utility for outreach design and health system readiness.
Social networks have an important impact on our health behaviours, including vaccination. People’s vaccination beliefs tend to mirror those of their social network. As social networks are homogenous in many ways, we sought to determine in the context of COVID-19 which factors were most predictive of belonging to a mostly vaccinated or unvaccinated social group.
We conducted a cross-sectional survey among Canadian residents in November and December 2021. Participants were asked about the vaccination status of their social networks their beliefs relating to COVID-19, and various sociodemographic factors. Respondents were split into three groups based on social network vaccination: low-, medium-, and high-risk. Chi-squared tests tested associations between factors and risk groups, and an ordinal logistic model was created to determine their direction and strength.
Most respondents (81.1 %) were classified as low risk (i.e., a mostly vaccinated social network) and few respondents (3.7 %) were classified as high-risk (i.e., an unvaccinated social group). Both the chi-square test (29.2 % difference between the low- and high- risk groups [1.8 % vs. 31.0 %], p < 0.001) and the ordinal logistic model (odds ratio between the low- and high-risk groups: 14.45, p < 0.01) found that respondents’ perceptions of COVID-19 as a “not at all serious” risk to Canadians was the most powerful predictor of belonging to a predominantly unvaccinated social circle. The model also found that those in mostly unvaccinated social circles also more often reported severe COVID-19 symptoms (odds ratio between the low- and high-risk groups: 2.26, p < 0.05).
Perception of COVID-19 as a threat to others may signal communities with lower vaccination coverage and higher risk of severe outcomes. This may have implications for strategies to improve public outreach, messaging, and planning for downstream consequences of low intervention uptake.</description><subject>Chi-square test</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>COVID-19 vaccines</subject><subject>Ethnicity</subject><subject>Health behavior</subject><subject>Health behaviours</subject><subject>Immunization</subject><subject>Polls & surveys</subject><subject>Public opinions</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Risk groups</subject><subject>Rural areas</subject><subject>SARS-CoV-2</subject><subject>Social interactions</subject><subject>Social networks</subject><subject>Social organization</subject><subject>Sociodemographics</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Vaccination</subject><subject>Vaccination / psychology</subject><issn>0264-410X</issn><issn>1873-2518</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE1rGzEQhkVoaBynPyFF0Esv62j04ZV6KcFNWkMgh3yQm9BKWpA_Vq606-J_Hzl2e-glMDAwPPOO9CB0CWQCBKZXi8nWWBs6P6GE8gmBUvQEjUDWrKIC5Ac0InTKKw7k5Qyd57wghAgG6iM6Y5IyCcBH6PEh2mBWuPP9n5iWOIW8xK2xfUwZm87h2f3z_EcFCh_OmT7E7hu-xjbFnKvs7X5QAvKQtn6Hcz-43QU6bc0q-0_HPkZPtzePs1_V3f3P-ez6rrJMyr4SljQMGtUo5SyXTUuprGvJnZK8Zu3UmcbxljvGwMlWcaBUMC9b1jAuQDRsjL4ecjcp_h587vU6ZOtXK9P5OGRNFeVKSSVFQb_8hy7ikMrD3yiqpqKGPSUO1Nvvkm_1JoW1STsNRO-164U-atd77ZpAKVr2Ph_Th2bt3b-tv54L8P0A-KJjG3zS2QbfWe9CKgq1i-GdE68x7pRt</recordid><startdate>20240206</startdate><enddate>20240206</enddate><creator>Memedovich, Ally</creator><creator>Orr, Taylor</creator><creator>Hollis, Aidan</creator><creator>Salmon, Charleen</creator><creator>Hu, Jia</creator><creator>Zinszer, Kate</creator><creator>Williamson, Tyler</creator><creator>Beall, Reed F.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3193-8088</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5029-2345</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8188-7616</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6548-3985</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5125-2193</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1294-731X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240206</creationdate><title>Social network risk factors and COVID-19 vaccination: A cross-sectional survey study</title><author>Memedovich, Ally ; Orr, Taylor ; Hollis, Aidan ; Salmon, Charleen ; Hu, Jia ; Zinszer, Kate ; Williamson, Tyler ; Beall, Reed F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-5c0b31b9b99dc48bf2287784d98473f6dabd4f4d331d8f9412253e8f3b34515b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Chi-square test</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>COVID-19 vaccines</topic><topic>Ethnicity</topic><topic>Health behavior</topic><topic>Health behaviours</topic><topic>Immunization</topic><topic>Polls & surveys</topic><topic>Public opinions</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Risk groups</topic><topic>Rural areas</topic><topic>SARS-CoV-2</topic><topic>Social interactions</topic><topic>Social networks</topic><topic>Social organization</topic><topic>Sociodemographics</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Vaccination</topic><topic>Vaccination / psychology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Memedovich, Ally</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orr, Taylor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hollis, Aidan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salmon, Charleen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hu, Jia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zinszer, Kate</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williamson, Tyler</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beall, Reed F.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Vaccine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Memedovich, Ally</au><au>Orr, Taylor</au><au>Hollis, Aidan</au><au>Salmon, Charleen</au><au>Hu, Jia</au><au>Zinszer, Kate</au><au>Williamson, Tyler</au><au>Beall, Reed F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Social network risk factors and COVID-19 vaccination: A cross-sectional survey study</atitle><jtitle>Vaccine</jtitle><addtitle>Vaccine</addtitle><date>2024-02-06</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>891</spage><epage>911</epage><pages>891-911</pages><issn>0264-410X</issn><eissn>1873-2518</eissn><abstract>•We surveyed 2,712 people in Canada following COVID-19 vaccine mandates in 2021.•Perceiving COVID-19 as less serious predicted reporting a mostly unvaccinated social circle.•Risk perception was a more powerful predictor than sociodemographic variables.•Risk perception may be a key indicator of social networks with lower intervention uptake.•Identifying high risk social circles has utility for outreach design and health system readiness.
Social networks have an important impact on our health behaviours, including vaccination. People’s vaccination beliefs tend to mirror those of their social network. As social networks are homogenous in many ways, we sought to determine in the context of COVID-19 which factors were most predictive of belonging to a mostly vaccinated or unvaccinated social group.
We conducted a cross-sectional survey among Canadian residents in November and December 2021. Participants were asked about the vaccination status of their social networks their beliefs relating to COVID-19, and various sociodemographic factors. Respondents were split into three groups based on social network vaccination: low-, medium-, and high-risk. Chi-squared tests tested associations between factors and risk groups, and an ordinal logistic model was created to determine their direction and strength.
Most respondents (81.1 %) were classified as low risk (i.e., a mostly vaccinated social network) and few respondents (3.7 %) were classified as high-risk (i.e., an unvaccinated social group). Both the chi-square test (29.2 % difference between the low- and high- risk groups [1.8 % vs. 31.0 %], p < 0.001) and the ordinal logistic model (odds ratio between the low- and high-risk groups: 14.45, p < 0.01) found that respondents’ perceptions of COVID-19 as a “not at all serious” risk to Canadians was the most powerful predictor of belonging to a predominantly unvaccinated social circle. The model also found that those in mostly unvaccinated social circles also more often reported severe COVID-19 symptoms (odds ratio between the low- and high-risk groups: 2.26, p < 0.05).
Perception of COVID-19 as a threat to others may signal communities with lower vaccination coverage and higher risk of severe outcomes. This may have implications for strategies to improve public outreach, messaging, and planning for downstream consequences of low intervention uptake.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>38238114</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.01.012</doi><tpages>21</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3193-8088</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5029-2345</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8188-7616</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6548-3985</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5125-2193</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1294-731X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0264-410X |
ispartof | Vaccine, 2024-02, Vol.42 (4), p.891-911 |
issn | 0264-410X 1873-2518 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2924998985 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete; ProQuest Central UK/Ireland |
subjects | Chi-square test COVID-19 COVID-19 vaccines Ethnicity Health behavior Health behaviours Immunization Polls & surveys Public opinions Questionnaires Risk factors Risk groups Rural areas SARS-CoV-2 Social interactions Social networks Social organization Sociodemographics Surveys Vaccination Vaccination / psychology |
title | Social network risk factors and COVID-19 vaccination: A cross-sectional survey study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T16%3A32%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Social%20network%20risk%20factors%20and%20COVID-19%20vaccination:%20A%20cross-sectional%20survey%20study&rft.jtitle=Vaccine&rft.au=Memedovich,%20Ally&rft.date=2024-02-06&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=891&rft.epage=911&rft.pages=891-911&rft.issn=0264-410X&rft.eissn=1873-2518&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.01.012&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2922965715%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2922965715&rft_id=info:pmid/38238114&rft_els_id=S0264410X24000057&rfr_iscdi=true |