Loading…

Attitude toward a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy and its determinants: Evidence from serial cross-sectional surveys conducted throughout the pandemic in Germany

Mandating vaccination against COVID-19 is often discussed as a means to counter low vaccine uptake. Beyond the potential legal, ethical, and psychological concerns, a successful implementation also needs to consider citizens’ support for such a policy. Public attitudes toward vaccination mandates an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Vaccine 2022-12, Vol.40 (51), p.7370-7377
Main Authors: Sprengholz, Philipp, Korn, Lars, Eitze, Sarah, Felgendreff, Lisa, Siegers, Regina, Goldhahn, Laura, De Bock, Freia, Huebl, Lena, Böhm, Robert, Betsch, Cornelia
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-f0c808001ad97deea812fb2d7aba346be394ccde805a2e698d343ebd0129b56f3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-f0c808001ad97deea812fb2d7aba346be394ccde805a2e698d343ebd0129b56f3
container_end_page 7377
container_issue 51
container_start_page 7370
container_title Vaccine
container_volume 40
creator Sprengholz, Philipp
Korn, Lars
Eitze, Sarah
Felgendreff, Lisa
Siegers, Regina
Goldhahn, Laura
De Bock, Freia
Huebl, Lena
Böhm, Robert
Betsch, Cornelia
description Mandating vaccination against COVID-19 is often discussed as a means to counter low vaccine uptake. Beyond the potential legal, ethical, and psychological concerns, a successful implementation also needs to consider citizens’ support for such a policy. Public attitudes toward vaccination mandates and their determinants might differ over time and, hence, should be monitored. Between April 2020 and April 2021, we investigated public support for mandatory vaccination policies in Germany and examined individual correlates, such as vaccination intentions, confidence in vaccine safety, and perceived collective responsibility, using a series of cross-sectional, quota-representative surveys (overall N = 27,509). Support for a vaccination mandate declined before the approval of the first vaccine against COVID-19 in December 2020 and increased afterwards. However, at the end of April 2021, only half of respondents were in favor of mandatory regulations. In general, mandates were endorsed by those who considered the vaccines to be safe, anticipated practical barriers, and felt responsible for the collective. On the contrary, perceiving vaccination as unnecessary and weighing the benefits and risks of vaccination was related to lower support. Older individuals and males more often endorsed vaccination mandates than did younger participants and females. Interestingly, there was a gap between vaccination intentions and support for mandates, showing that the attitude toward mandatory vaccination was not only determined by vaccination-related factors such as vaccine safety or prosocial considerations. Because of low public support, mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 should be considered a measure of last resort in Germany. However, if removing barriers to vaccination and educational campaigns about vaccine safety and the societal benefits of high vaccination uptake are not sufficient for increasing vaccination uptake to the required levels, mandates could be introduced. In this case, measures to ensure and increase acceptance and adherence should be taken.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.01.065
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8830774</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0264410X2200130X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2743489353</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-f0c808001ad97deea812fb2d7aba346be394ccde805a2e698d343ebd0129b56f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkk1v1DAQhiMEokvhJ4AsceGS4I98OBxA1VJKpUq9AOJmOfak61ViL7YTlF_E38Rhlwq4cLKteead8cybZc8JLggm9et9MUuljIWCYkoLTApcVw-yDeENy2lF-MNsg2ld5iXBX8-yJyHsMcYVI-3j7IxVpGK4pZvsx0WMJk4aUHTfpddIolFaLaPzC9refrl-n5MWHUvJaJxFBzcYtaAEIRMD0hDBjyloY3iDLmejwSpAvXcjCuCNHJDyLoQ8gFrz0ztMfoYlIOWsnlQEjeLOu-lu56aYroAOSRxGo5Cx6CqpS7s8zR71cgjw7HSeZ58_XH7afsxvbq-utxc3uapJFfMeK445xkTqttEAkhPad1Q3spOsrDtgbamUBo4rSaFuuWYlg05jQtuuqnt2nr096h6mbgStwEYvB3HwZpR-EU4a8XfEmp24c7PgnOGmKZPAq5OAd98mCFGMJigYBmnBTUHQmvK6qUu-oi__Qfdu8mlCiUpKJW9ZxRJVHalfY_TQ3zdDsFitIPbiZAWxWkFgIpIVUt6LP39yn_V79wl4dwQgzXM24EVQZl2eNj7tSmhn_lPiJ_bKzMI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2743489353</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Attitude toward a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy and its determinants: Evidence from serial cross-sectional surveys conducted throughout the pandemic in Germany</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Sprengholz, Philipp ; Korn, Lars ; Eitze, Sarah ; Felgendreff, Lisa ; Siegers, Regina ; Goldhahn, Laura ; De Bock, Freia ; Huebl, Lena ; Böhm, Robert ; Betsch, Cornelia</creator><creatorcontrib>Sprengholz, Philipp ; Korn, Lars ; Eitze, Sarah ; Felgendreff, Lisa ; Siegers, Regina ; Goldhahn, Laura ; De Bock, Freia ; Huebl, Lena ; Böhm, Robert ; Betsch, Cornelia</creatorcontrib><description>Mandating vaccination against COVID-19 is often discussed as a means to counter low vaccine uptake. Beyond the potential legal, ethical, and psychological concerns, a successful implementation also needs to consider citizens’ support for such a policy. Public attitudes toward vaccination mandates and their determinants might differ over time and, hence, should be monitored. Between April 2020 and April 2021, we investigated public support for mandatory vaccination policies in Germany and examined individual correlates, such as vaccination intentions, confidence in vaccine safety, and perceived collective responsibility, using a series of cross-sectional, quota-representative surveys (overall N = 27,509). Support for a vaccination mandate declined before the approval of the first vaccine against COVID-19 in December 2020 and increased afterwards. However, at the end of April 2021, only half of respondents were in favor of mandatory regulations. In general, mandates were endorsed by those who considered the vaccines to be safe, anticipated practical barriers, and felt responsible for the collective. On the contrary, perceiving vaccination as unnecessary and weighing the benefits and risks of vaccination was related to lower support. Older individuals and males more often endorsed vaccination mandates than did younger participants and females. Interestingly, there was a gap between vaccination intentions and support for mandates, showing that the attitude toward mandatory vaccination was not only determined by vaccination-related factors such as vaccine safety or prosocial considerations. Because of low public support, mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 should be considered a measure of last resort in Germany. However, if removing barriers to vaccination and educational campaigns about vaccine safety and the societal benefits of high vaccination uptake are not sufficient for increasing vaccination uptake to the required levels, mandates could be introduced. In this case, measures to ensure and increase acceptance and adherence should be taken.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0264-410X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2518</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.01.065</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35153092</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Attitude ; Attitudes ; Coronaviruses ; COVID-19 ; COVID-19 - prevention &amp; control ; COVID-19 Vaccines ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Female ; Fines &amp; penalties ; Germany - epidemiology ; Humans ; Immunization ; Male ; Mandates ; Measles ; Pandemics ; Policy ; Safety ; Surveys ; Vaccination ; Vaccines</subject><ispartof>Vaccine, 2022-12, Vol.40 (51), p.7370-7377</ispartof><rights>2022 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2022. Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-f0c808001ad97deea812fb2d7aba346be394ccde805a2e698d343ebd0129b56f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-f0c808001ad97deea812fb2d7aba346be394ccde805a2e698d343ebd0129b56f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6806-0374</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35153092$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sprengholz, Philipp</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Korn, Lars</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eitze, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Felgendreff, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siegers, Regina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goldhahn, Laura</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Bock, Freia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huebl, Lena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Böhm, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Betsch, Cornelia</creatorcontrib><title>Attitude toward a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy and its determinants: Evidence from serial cross-sectional surveys conducted throughout the pandemic in Germany</title><title>Vaccine</title><addtitle>Vaccine</addtitle><description>Mandating vaccination against COVID-19 is often discussed as a means to counter low vaccine uptake. Beyond the potential legal, ethical, and psychological concerns, a successful implementation also needs to consider citizens’ support for such a policy. Public attitudes toward vaccination mandates and their determinants might differ over time and, hence, should be monitored. Between April 2020 and April 2021, we investigated public support for mandatory vaccination policies in Germany and examined individual correlates, such as vaccination intentions, confidence in vaccine safety, and perceived collective responsibility, using a series of cross-sectional, quota-representative surveys (overall N = 27,509). Support for a vaccination mandate declined before the approval of the first vaccine against COVID-19 in December 2020 and increased afterwards. However, at the end of April 2021, only half of respondents were in favor of mandatory regulations. In general, mandates were endorsed by those who considered the vaccines to be safe, anticipated practical barriers, and felt responsible for the collective. On the contrary, perceiving vaccination as unnecessary and weighing the benefits and risks of vaccination was related to lower support. Older individuals and males more often endorsed vaccination mandates than did younger participants and females. Interestingly, there was a gap between vaccination intentions and support for mandates, showing that the attitude toward mandatory vaccination was not only determined by vaccination-related factors such as vaccine safety or prosocial considerations. Because of low public support, mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 should be considered a measure of last resort in Germany. However, if removing barriers to vaccination and educational campaigns about vaccine safety and the societal benefits of high vaccination uptake are not sufficient for increasing vaccination uptake to the required levels, mandates could be introduced. In this case, measures to ensure and increase acceptance and adherence should be taken.</description><subject>Attitude</subject><subject>Attitudes</subject><subject>Coronaviruses</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>COVID-19 - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>COVID-19 Vaccines</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fines &amp; penalties</subject><subject>Germany - epidemiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunization</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mandates</subject><subject>Measles</subject><subject>Pandemics</subject><subject>Policy</subject><subject>Safety</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Vaccination</subject><subject>Vaccines</subject><issn>0264-410X</issn><issn>1873-2518</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkk1v1DAQhiMEokvhJ4AsceGS4I98OBxA1VJKpUq9AOJmOfak61ViL7YTlF_E38Rhlwq4cLKteead8cybZc8JLggm9et9MUuljIWCYkoLTApcVw-yDeENy2lF-MNsg2ld5iXBX8-yJyHsMcYVI-3j7IxVpGK4pZvsx0WMJk4aUHTfpddIolFaLaPzC9refrl-n5MWHUvJaJxFBzcYtaAEIRMD0hDBjyloY3iDLmejwSpAvXcjCuCNHJDyLoQ8gFrz0ztMfoYlIOWsnlQEjeLOu-lu56aYroAOSRxGo5Cx6CqpS7s8zR71cgjw7HSeZ58_XH7afsxvbq-utxc3uapJFfMeK445xkTqttEAkhPad1Q3spOsrDtgbamUBo4rSaFuuWYlg05jQtuuqnt2nr096h6mbgStwEYvB3HwZpR-EU4a8XfEmp24c7PgnOGmKZPAq5OAd98mCFGMJigYBmnBTUHQmvK6qUu-oi__Qfdu8mlCiUpKJW9ZxRJVHalfY_TQ3zdDsFitIPbiZAWxWkFgIpIVUt6LP39yn_V79wl4dwQgzXM24EVQZl2eNj7tSmhn_lPiJ_bKzMI</recordid><startdate>20221205</startdate><enddate>20221205</enddate><creator>Sprengholz, Philipp</creator><creator>Korn, Lars</creator><creator>Eitze, Sarah</creator><creator>Felgendreff, Lisa</creator><creator>Siegers, Regina</creator><creator>Goldhahn, Laura</creator><creator>De Bock, Freia</creator><creator>Huebl, Lena</creator><creator>Böhm, Robert</creator><creator>Betsch, Cornelia</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</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><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6806-0374</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221205</creationdate><title>Attitude toward a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy and its determinants: Evidence from serial cross-sectional surveys conducted throughout the pandemic in Germany</title><author>Sprengholz, Philipp ; Korn, Lars ; Eitze, Sarah ; Felgendreff, Lisa ; Siegers, Regina ; Goldhahn, Laura ; De Bock, Freia ; Huebl, Lena ; Böhm, Robert ; Betsch, Cornelia</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-f0c808001ad97deea812fb2d7aba346be394ccde805a2e698d343ebd0129b56f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Attitude</topic><topic>Attitudes</topic><topic>Coronaviruses</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>COVID-19 - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>COVID-19 Vaccines</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fines &amp; penalties</topic><topic>Germany - epidemiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunization</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mandates</topic><topic>Measles</topic><topic>Pandemics</topic><topic>Policy</topic><topic>Safety</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Vaccination</topic><topic>Vaccines</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sprengholz, Philipp</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Korn, Lars</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eitze, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Felgendreff, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siegers, Regina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goldhahn, Laura</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Bock, Freia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huebl, Lena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Böhm, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Betsch, Cornelia</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Source</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health and Medical</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)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</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 &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Database (Proquest)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Proquest)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; 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><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Vaccine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sprengholz, Philipp</au><au>Korn, Lars</au><au>Eitze, Sarah</au><au>Felgendreff, Lisa</au><au>Siegers, Regina</au><au>Goldhahn, Laura</au><au>De Bock, Freia</au><au>Huebl, Lena</au><au>Böhm, Robert</au><au>Betsch, Cornelia</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Attitude toward a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy and its determinants: Evidence from serial cross-sectional surveys conducted throughout the pandemic in Germany</atitle><jtitle>Vaccine</jtitle><addtitle>Vaccine</addtitle><date>2022-12-05</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>40</volume><issue>51</issue><spage>7370</spage><epage>7377</epage><pages>7370-7377</pages><issn>0264-410X</issn><eissn>1873-2518</eissn><abstract>Mandating vaccination against COVID-19 is often discussed as a means to counter low vaccine uptake. Beyond the potential legal, ethical, and psychological concerns, a successful implementation also needs to consider citizens’ support for such a policy. Public attitudes toward vaccination mandates and their determinants might differ over time and, hence, should be monitored. Between April 2020 and April 2021, we investigated public support for mandatory vaccination policies in Germany and examined individual correlates, such as vaccination intentions, confidence in vaccine safety, and perceived collective responsibility, using a series of cross-sectional, quota-representative surveys (overall N = 27,509). Support for a vaccination mandate declined before the approval of the first vaccine against COVID-19 in December 2020 and increased afterwards. However, at the end of April 2021, only half of respondents were in favor of mandatory regulations. In general, mandates were endorsed by those who considered the vaccines to be safe, anticipated practical barriers, and felt responsible for the collective. On the contrary, perceiving vaccination as unnecessary and weighing the benefits and risks of vaccination was related to lower support. Older individuals and males more often endorsed vaccination mandates than did younger participants and females. Interestingly, there was a gap between vaccination intentions and support for mandates, showing that the attitude toward mandatory vaccination was not only determined by vaccination-related factors such as vaccine safety or prosocial considerations. Because of low public support, mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 should be considered a measure of last resort in Germany. However, if removing barriers to vaccination and educational campaigns about vaccine safety and the societal benefits of high vaccination uptake are not sufficient for increasing vaccination uptake to the required levels, mandates could be introduced. In this case, measures to ensure and increase acceptance and adherence should be taken.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>35153092</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.01.065</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6806-0374</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0264-410X
ispartof Vaccine, 2022-12, Vol.40 (51), p.7370-7377
issn 0264-410X
1873-2518
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8830774
source ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Attitude
Attitudes
Coronaviruses
COVID-19
COVID-19 - prevention & control
COVID-19 Vaccines
Cross-Sectional Studies
Female
Fines & penalties
Germany - epidemiology
Humans
Immunization
Male
Mandates
Measles
Pandemics
Policy
Safety
Surveys
Vaccination
Vaccines
title Attitude toward a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy and its determinants: Evidence from serial cross-sectional surveys conducted throughout the pandemic in Germany
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T13%3A06%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Attitude%20toward%20a%20mandatory%20COVID-19%20vaccination%20policy%20and%20its%20determinants:%20Evidence%20from%20serial%20cross-sectional%20surveys%20conducted%20throughout%20the%20pandemic%20in%20Germany&rft.jtitle=Vaccine&rft.au=Sprengholz,%20Philipp&rft.date=2022-12-05&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=51&rft.spage=7370&rft.epage=7377&rft.pages=7370-7377&rft.issn=0264-410X&rft.eissn=1873-2518&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.01.065&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2743489353%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-f0c808001ad97deea812fb2d7aba346be394ccde805a2e698d343ebd0129b56f3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2743489353&rft_id=info:pmid/35153092&rfr_iscdi=true