IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Archives of Public Health Pub Date : 2025-02-25 DOI:10.1186/s13690-025-01542-2
Libia Santos-Requejo, Obdulia María Torres-González
{"title":"Between intention and action: the paradoxes of female vaccination.","authors":"Libia Santos-Requejo, Obdulia María Torres-González","doi":"10.1186/s13690-025-01542-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The article addresses two paradoxes related to the vaccination of women in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The first paradox lies in the fact that, though women tend to be more concerned about health issues, they declare less of an intention to vaccinate than do men. The second paradox is that, despite reporting less intention to vaccinate, women actually take up vaccines more than men. This article sets out to study the reasons for these paradoxes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used information from a representative sample of the Spanish population. A dichotomous variable was created ('change' versus 'consistency', in relation to respondents' intention and final decision to get vaccinated), and two logistic regression models were applied: one for the group of women and the other for the group of men.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Several factors have been identified as influencing the change of opinion: such as trust in the health system, conspiracy beliefs about vaccines, positive evaluation of science and technology, level of knowledge, ideology and religion. It is noteworthy that several differences are found between men and women in terms of the factors causing them to change their opinion about vaccination.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The most relevant conclusion is that intention studies in the field of vaccination lose predictive power in the case of women's vaccination. It should also be noted that, with women, there are no factors that conclusively explain their change of opinion. Therefore, if the factors influencing vaccination behaviour are to be discovered, it is necessary to modify the questions included in the questionnaires in order to find the variables that explain women's behaviour.</p>","PeriodicalId":48578,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Public Health","volume":"83 1","pages":"53"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11853196/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-025-01542-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:文章探讨了在 COVID-19 大流行的背景下与妇女接种疫苗有关的两个悖论。第一个悖论在于,尽管女性往往更关注健康问题,但她们宣布接种疫苗的意愿却低于男性。第二个悖论是,尽管女性表示接种疫苗的意愿较低,但实际上接种疫苗的人数却多于男性。本文旨在研究产生这些矛盾的原因:方法:我们使用了具有代表性的西班牙人口样本信息。我们创建了一个二分变量(与受访者接种疫苗的意向和最终决定有关的 "改变 "和 "一致"),并应用了两个逻辑回归模型:一个是女性组,另一个是男性组:结果:有几个因素被认为会影响意见的改变:如对卫生系统的信任、对疫苗的阴谋信念、对科学技术的积极评价、知识水平、意识形态和宗教信仰。值得注意的是,男性和女性在导致他们改变对疫苗接种看法的因素方面存在一些差异:最相关的结论是,疫苗接种领域的意向研究对妇女接种疫苗失去了预测力。还应该指出的是,对于妇女而言,没有任何因素能最终解释她们意见的改变。因此,如果要发现影响疫苗接种行为的因素,就有必要修改问卷中的问题,以便找到能解释妇女行为的变量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Between intention and action: the paradoxes of female vaccination.

Background: The article addresses two paradoxes related to the vaccination of women in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The first paradox lies in the fact that, though women tend to be more concerned about health issues, they declare less of an intention to vaccinate than do men. The second paradox is that, despite reporting less intention to vaccinate, women actually take up vaccines more than men. This article sets out to study the reasons for these paradoxes.

Methods: We used information from a representative sample of the Spanish population. A dichotomous variable was created ('change' versus 'consistency', in relation to respondents' intention and final decision to get vaccinated), and two logistic regression models were applied: one for the group of women and the other for the group of men.

Results: Several factors have been identified as influencing the change of opinion: such as trust in the health system, conspiracy beliefs about vaccines, positive evaluation of science and technology, level of knowledge, ideology and religion. It is noteworthy that several differences are found between men and women in terms of the factors causing them to change their opinion about vaccination.

Conclusions: The most relevant conclusion is that intention studies in the field of vaccination lose predictive power in the case of women's vaccination. It should also be noted that, with women, there are no factors that conclusively explain their change of opinion. Therefore, if the factors influencing vaccination behaviour are to be discovered, it is necessary to modify the questions included in the questionnaires in order to find the variables that explain women's behaviour.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Archives of Public Health
Archives of Public Health Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
3.00%
发文量
244
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: rchives of Public Health is a broad scope public health journal, dedicated to publishing all sound science in the field of public health. The journal aims to better the understanding of the health of populations. The journal contributes to public health knowledge, enhances the interaction between research, policy and practice and stimulates public health monitoring and indicator development. The journal considers submissions on health outcomes and their determinants, with clear statements about the public health and policy implications. Archives of Public Health welcomes methodological papers (e.g., on study design and bias), papers on health services research, health economics, community interventions, and epidemiological studies dealing with international comparisons, the determinants of inequality in health, and the environmental, behavioural, social, demographic and occupational correlates of health and diseases.
期刊最新文献
Assessing the transferability potential of policy practices for older people. Healthy ageing for older adult people with intellectual disability: a scoping review. Analysis of factors influencing attrition among clinical traditional Chinese medical major graduates: based on a discrete choice experiment. Between intention and action: the paradoxes of female vaccination. Usability of technological tools to overcome language barriers in healthcare- a scoping review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1