IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0279393.html

Trustworthiness of information sources on vaccines for COVID-19 prevention among Brazilians

Author

Listed:
  • Adriana Teixeira Reis
  • Karla Gonçalves Camacho
  • Maria de Fátima Junqueira-Marinho
  • Saint Clair dos Santos Gomes Junior
  • Dimitri Marques Abramov
  • Livia Almeida de Menezes
  • Marcio Fernandes Nehab
  • Carlos Eduardo da Silva Figueiredo
  • Maria Elisabeth Lopes Moreira
  • Zilton Farias Meira de Vasconcelos
  • Flavia Amendola Anisio de Carvalho
  • Livia de Rezende de Mello
  • Roberta Fernandes Correia
  • Zina Maria Almeida de Azevedo
  • Margarida dos Santos Salú
  • Daniella Campelo Batalha Cox Moore

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to assess the trustworthiness of information sources, perception of clear information about the vaccine, and strategies to increase adherence to vaccination to provide managers with information that helps establish effective communication with the population about vaccination. Method: This is an online survey conducted between January 22 and 29, 2021, preceded by an Informed Consent, that aims to assess vaccine hesitancy, which corresponded to the first week of vaccination initiation to prevent COVID-19 in Brazil. Data were obtained from a questionnaire made available through a free platform and stored in Google Forms and later exported to the SPSS statistical package for analysis. The sample consisted of all questionnaires from participants who self-declared as age 18 or older, Brazilian, and residing in Brazil at the time of the survey. Incomplete records with more than 50% of blank items and duplicates were excluded. All categorical variables were analyzed from their absolute and relative frequencies. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to verify the relationship between dependent variables and independent variables. Results: The results show that trust in information sources diverges between hesitant and non-hesitant. They also showed that some participants show an overall distrust that seems to have deeper foundations than issues related only to the source of information. The high rejection of television and the WHO as sources of information among hesitant suggests that integrated actions with research institutes, public figures vaccinating, and religious leaders can help to combat vaccine hesitation. Two actors become particularly important in this dynamic, both for good and bad, and their anti-vaxxer behavior must be observed: the doctor and the Ministry of Health. Conclusion: This study contributes to gathering valuable information to help understand the behavior and thinking relevant to the adherence to vaccination recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Adriana Teixeira Reis & Karla Gonçalves Camacho & Maria de Fátima Junqueira-Marinho & Saint Clair dos Santos Gomes Junior & Dimitri Marques Abramov & Livia Almeida de Menezes & Marcio Fernandes Nehab , 2023. "Trustworthiness of information sources on vaccines for COVID-19 prevention among Brazilians," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(1), pages 1-14, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0279393
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279393
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0279393
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0279393&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0279393?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sebastian Neumann-Böhme & Nirosha Elsem Varghese & Iryna Sabat & Pedro Pita Barros & Werner Brouwer & Job van Exel & Jonas Schreyögg & Tom Stargardt, 2020. "Once we have it, will we use it? A European survey on willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 977-982, September.
    2. Vincenzo Galasso & Vincent Pons & Paola Profeta & Michael Becher & Sylvain Brouard & Martial Foucault, 2020. "Gender Differences in COVID-19 Related Attitudes and Behavior: Evidence from a Panel Survey in Eight OECD Countries," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-03594437, HAL.
    3. Jamie Murphy & Frédérique Vallières & Richard P. Bentall & Mark Shevlin & Orla McBride & Todd K. Hartman & Ryan McKay & Kate Bennett & Liam Mason & Jilly Gibson-Miller & Liat Levita & Anton P. Martine, 2021. "Psychological characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in Ireland and the United Kingdom," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/30j8b527qi94hpffbv52bsav72 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ashlin Lee & Marian Sheppard & Claire K. Naughtin & Megan A. Rebuli & Emily Brindal, 2025. "Key Predictors that Characterize Different Stances on Significant Global Scientific Challenges: Comparing Vaccine and Climate Change Beliefs," SAGE Open, , vol. 15(1), pages 21582440251, March.
    2. Takahashi, Masaki & Takaku, Reo & Ashida, Toyo & Ibuka, Yoko, 2025. "Public investment on health and voter responses: Evidence from the mass vaccination during COVID-19," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    3. Peer Henri Kieweg & Stefanie Schöberl & Gabriele Palozzi, 2021. "The Role of Communication In COVID-19 Crisis Management: Findings about Information Behavior of German and Italian Young People," International Journal of Business Research and Management (IJBRM), Computer Science Journals (CSC Journals), vol. 12(5), pages 263-288, October.
    4. Jian Cao & Christina M. Ramirez & R. Michael Alvarez, 2022. "The politics of vaccine hesitancy in the United States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(1), pages 42-54, January.
    5. Foliano, Francesca & Tonei, Valentina & Sevilla, Almudena, 2024. "Social restrictions, leisure and well-being," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    6. Giulietti, Corrado & Vlassopoulos, Michael & Zenou, Yves, 2023. "When reality bites: Local deaths and vaccine take-up," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    7. Sonia OREFICCE & Climent Quintana-Domeque, 2021. "Gender inequality in COVID-19 times: evidence from UK prolific participants," JODE - Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 261-287, June.
    8. Pronkina, Elizaveta & Berniell, Inés & Fawaz, Yarine & Laferrère, Anne & Mira, Pedro, 2023. "The COVID-19 curtain: Can past communist regimes explain the vaccination divide in Europe?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 321(C).
    9. Xiang, Hongzhe & Li, Yiwei & Guo, Yu, 2023. "Promoting COVID-19 booster vaccines in Macao: A psychological reactance perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 332(C).
    10. Thomas Wein, 2021. "Ist eine Impfpflicht gegen das Coronavirus nötig? [Is Mandatory Vaccination Against the Coronavirus Necessary?]," Wirtschaftsdienst, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 101(2), pages 114-120, February.
    11. Sou Hyun Jang, 2022. "Social-ecological factors related to preventive behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Korea," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-14, March.
    12. Albanese, Andrea & Fallucchi, Francesco & Verheyden, Bertrand, 2021. "Can a supranational medicines agency restore trust after vaccine suspensions? The case of Vaxzevria," GLO Discussion Paper Series 878, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    13. Jacques Bughin & Michele Cincera & Kelly Peters & Dorota Reykowska & Marcin Zyszkiewicz & Rafal Ohme, 2021. "Make it or Break it: Vaccination Intention at the Time of Covid-19," Working Papers TIMES² 2021-043, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    14. Victoria Costoya & Lucía Echeverría & María Edo & Ana Rocha & Agustina Thailinger, 2020. "The impact of COVID-19 in the allocation of time within couples. Evidence for Argentina," Working Papers 145, Universidad de San Andres, Departamento de Economia, revised Aug 2020.
    15. Principe, Francesco & Weber, Guglielmo, 2023. "Online health information seeking and Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy: Evidence from 50+ Europeans," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    16. Sebastian Neumann-Böhme & Iryna Sabat & Carolin Brinkmann & Arthur E. Attema & Tom Stargardt & Jonas Schreyögg & Werner Brouwer, 2023. "Jumping the Queue:Willingness to Pay for Faster Access to COVID-19 Vaccines in Seven European Countries," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 41(10), pages 1389-1402, October.
    17. Hill, Patrick L. & Burrow, Anthony L. & Strecher, Victor J., 2021. "Sense of purpose in life predicts greater willingness for COVID-19 vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 284(C).
    18. Kejriwal, Saransh & Sheth, Sarjan & Silpa, P.S. & Sarkar, Sumit & Guha, Apratim, 2022. "Attaining herd immunity to a new infectious disease through multi-stage policies incentivising voluntary vaccination," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    19. Codruta Mare & Stefana Belbe & Norbert Petrovici, 2025. "Exploring the spatial clustering and spillover effects of COVID-19 vaccination uptake in Romania: an analysis at municipality level," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 109(4), pages 667-688, December.
    20. Muhammad Usman & Li Yuyan & Mudassir Husnain & Muhammad Waheed Akhtar, 2024. "COVID-19, travel restrictions and environmental consequences," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 10261-10281, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0279393. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.