4.6 Review

Public attitudes and influencing factors toward COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents/children: a scoping review

期刊

PUBLIC HEALTH
卷 205, 期 -, 页码 169-181

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.puhe.2022.02.002

关键词

COVID-19; Vaccine; Adolescents; Children; Attitude; Scoping review

资金

  1. Education Department of Hunan Province [19A419]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study systematically clarified the attitudes and influencing factors of the public towards COVID-19 vaccination for children or adolescents. The results showed that the acceptance rate of the public varied, and the characteristics of parents or adolescents and factors such as vaccine safety and effectiveness were the main influencing factors for vaccination.
Objective: This study aimed to systematically clarify attitudes and influencing factors of the public toward COVID-19 vaccination for children or adolescents. Study design: This was a scoping review. Methods: This scoping review screened, included, sorted, and analyzed relevant studies on COVID-19 vaccination for children or adolescents before December 31, 2021, in databases, including PubMed, Elsevier, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Wiley. Results: A total of 34 studies were included. The results showed that the public's acceptance rate toward COVID-19 vaccination for children or adolescents ranged from 4.9% (southeast Nigerian mothers) to 91% (Brazilian parents). Parents' or adolescents' age, gender, education level, and cognition and behavior characteristics for the vaccines were the central factors affecting vaccination. The vaccine's safety, effectiveness, and potential side-effects were the main reasons affecting vaccination. Conclusions: Realizing current public attitudes of COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents or children can effectively develop intervention measures and control the pandemic as soon as possible through herd immunity. (c) 2022 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据