IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v606y2022i7914d10.1038_s41586-022-04805-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Communicating doctors’ consensus persistently increases COVID-19 vaccinations

Author

Listed:
  • Vojtěch Bartoš

    (University of Munich
    University of Milan)

  • Michal Bauer

    (CERGE-EI, a joint workplace of Charles University and the Economics Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences
    Charles University)

  • Jana Cahlíková

    (Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance)

  • Julie Chytilová

    (CERGE-EI, a joint workplace of Charles University and the Economics Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences
    Charles University)

Abstract

The reluctance of people to get vaccinated represents a fundamental challenge to containing the spread of deadly infectious diseases1,2, including COVID-19. Identifying misperceptions that can fuel vaccine hesitancy and creating effective communication strategies to overcome them are a global public health priority3–5. Medical doctors are a trusted source of advice about vaccinations6, but media reports may create an inaccurate impression that vaccine controversy is prevalent among doctors, even when a broad consensus exists7,8. Here we show that public misperceptions about the views of doctors on the COVID-19 vaccines are widespread, and correcting them increases vaccine uptake. We implement a survey among 9,650 doctors in the Czech Republic and find that 90% of doctors trust the vaccines. Next, we show that 90% of respondents in a nationally representative sample (n = 2,101) underestimate doctors’ trust; the most common belief is that only 50% of doctors trust the vaccines. Finally, we integrate randomized provision of information about the true views held by doctors into a longitudinal data collection that regularly monitors vaccination status over 9 months. The treatment recalibrates beliefs and leads to a persistent increase in vaccine uptake. The approach demonstrated in this paper shows how the engagement of professional medical associations, with their unparalleled capacity to elicit individual views of doctors on a large scale, can help to create a cheap, scalable intervention that has lasting positive impacts on health behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Vojtěch Bartoš & Michal Bauer & Jana Cahlíková & Julie Chytilová, 2022. "Communicating doctors’ consensus persistently increases COVID-19 vaccinations," Nature, Nature, vol. 606(7914), pages 542-549, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:606:y:2022:i:7914:d:10.1038_s41586-022-04805-y
    DOI: 10.1038/s41586-022-04805-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04805-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41586-022-04805-y?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jakub Grossmann & Stepan Jurajda, 2023. "Voting under Debtor Distress," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp744, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    2. Eleonora Alabrese & Francesco Capozza & Prashant Garg, 2024. "Politicized Scientists: Credibility Cost of Political Expression on Twitter," CESifo Working Paper Series 11254, CESifo.
    3. Josue Garcia-Arch & Itxaso Barberia & Javier Rodríguez-Ferreiro & Lluís Fuentemilla, 2022. "Authority Brings Responsibility: Feedback from Experts Promotes an Overweighting of Health-Related Pseudoscientific Beliefs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-11, November.
    4. Andreas Steinmayr & Manuel Rossi, 2024. "Vaccine‐skeptic physicians and patient vaccination decisions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(3), pages 509-525, March.
    5. Silvia Saccardo & Hengchen Dai & Maria A. Han & Sitaram Vangala & Juyea Hoo & Jeffrey Fujimoto, 2024. "Field testing the transferability of behavioural science knowledge on promoting vaccinations," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(5), pages 878-890, May.
    6. Alena Bicakova & Stepan Jurajda, 2024. "COVID-19 and Political Preferences Through Stages of the Pandemic: The Case of the Czech Republic," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp778, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    7. Singh, Renu, 2023. "Priming COVID-19's consequences can increase support for investments in public health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    8. Kun Sun & Tian-Fang Zhao & Xiao-Kun Wu & Kai-Sheng Lai & Wei-Neng Chen & Jin-Sheng Zhang, 2022. "Incorporating Fuzzy Cognitive Inference for Vaccine Hesitancy Measuring," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-18, July.

    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:nat:nature:v:606:y:2022:i:7914:d:10.1038_s41586-022-04805-y. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    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.