Table 1.
Description of studies (n = 60) included in review
| Author |
N, % female |
Sample, Recruitment | Countrya | Month | Publication Type | Intention Item | Quality Rating |
Frequencies | Reported Gender Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adebisi et al. (2020) | 517, 43.1 |
Non-probabilty convenient sample, social media platforms |
NGA | Aug | PP | ‘Will you take COVID-19 vaccine?’ Yes/ No | 8 |
YR YN |
n.s. χ2 = 1.53 P value = 0.22 |
| Akarsu et al. (2020) | 759, 62.8 | Snowball sample, social media platforms | TUR | Jun–Jul | PR |
Exact wording n.a. Vaccination request: Yes, get vaccinated/ If it’s free, get it done/ No, do not get vaccinated/ Undecided |
7 |
YR YN |
Yes Women had more negative opinions (do not get vaccinated/ undecided) about getting vaccinated than men (P = 0.001). |
| Ali et al. (2020) | 5,677, 69.5 | Snowball sample, users of social media platforms |
BHR, KWT, SAU, ARE, OMN, QAT […]b |
Mar–Apr | PR |
‘Suppose that a safe and effective coronavirus vaccine was available today. How likely are you to get yourself vaccinated?’ 1 (very likely) – 5 (very unlikely) 3 = neutral |
7 |
YR YN |
Yes (no exact statistics reported) Male subjects, reported a higher likelihood of vaccinating, expressed as ‘very likely’ and ‘somewhat likely’. |
| Al-Mohaithef and Padhi (2020) | 992, 65.83 |
Snowball sample, social media platforms + e-mails |
SAU | NA | PR |
‘If vaccine against the coronavirus is available, I will take it’ Yes/No/Not Sure |
3* |
YR YN |
n.s. p > 0.08 |
| Barry et al. (2020) | 1,512, 62.4 | Convenient sample of health care workers, social media platforms + e-mail | KSA | Nov | PP |
Exact wording n.a. Readiness to receive COVID-19 vaccine: as soon as possible/ waiting for a few months/ never accept a vaccine |
7* |
YR YN |
Yes Males were 1.55 times more likely to accept a COVID-19 vaccine than females (p = .008). |
| Butter et al. (2020) | 1,605, 68.6 | Convenient sample of key workers and non-key workers, social media platforms, survey platform | GBR | Mar–Apr | PP |
‘If a new vaccine was to be developed for coronavirus (COVID-19) and was available to you, would you accept it for yourself?’ Yes/ Do not know/ No |
6* | NA |
UNSURE Key worker sample: being female associated with vaccine hesitancy (OR = 1.96, [1.16–3.32]) not in the non-key worker sample (OR = 1.15, [0.83–1.59]) |
| Callaghan et al. (2020) | 5,009, NA | Quota sampling that mirrors population benchmarks, survey platform | USA | May–Jun | PP | ‘Scientists around the world are working on developing a vaccine to protect individuals against the coronavirus. If a vaccine is developed, would you pursue getting vaccinated for the coronavirus?’ Yes/ No | 8*g |
YR YN |
Yes Odds of vaccination refusal significantly higher for women (OR: 1.72, CI: 1.42, 2.08) |
| Daly and Robinson (2020) | 7,547, 52.1 | Nationally representative longitudinal study, Understanding America Study (UAS) | USA | Apr–Oct | PP |
Exact wording n.a. How likely there were to get vaccinated for coronavirus when a vaccine becomes available to the public: Very likely/ Somewhat likely/ Undecided/ Somewhat unlikely/ Very unlikely (5 points) |
11* |
YR YN |
Yes Females were at elevated relative risk of being undecided or unwilling to vaccinate (undecided: RRR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.20–1.65; unwilling: RRR = 1.29, 21,995% CI: 1.14–1.46). |
| Davis et al. (2020) | 1,008, 55.1 | National household survey weighted to permit national estimates of parents with at least 1 child younger than age 18 | USA | Jun | PP |
‘If a vaccine against COVID-19 becomes available in the next 12 months, how likely are you to get it for [yourself/your child(ren)]?’ 1 (very likely) – 4 (somewhat likely) |
8* |
YR YN |
UNSURE Sex was associated with parents’ likelihood to vaccinate their children and themselves in bivariate analyses p = .039. n.s. in multivariable analyses |
| Detoc et al. (2020) | 3,259, 67.4 | Adult general population & adult patients, social networks, e-mails, website of University Hospital, centers for COVID-19 diagnosis, medical centers | FRA | Mar | PP |
Exact wording n.a. Willingness to get vaccinated: Strongly agree/ agree/ do not know/ disagree/ strongly disagree (5 points) |
7* | YR |
Yes Among men, more vaccine acceptors than among women, p < 0.005 In multivariable analyses, male gender remained associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance OR: 1.878 (1.529–2.306). |
| Dror er al. (2020) | 1661, NA | Stratified for health care personnel at academic medical centers across Israels or members of general population, survey platform | ISR | Mar–Apr | PR |
Exact wording n.a. Whether participants intend to accept future COVID-19 vaccination: Avoid/ Accept |
6*g | NA |
Yes Males more likely to accept the potential COVID-19 vaccine |
| Earnshaw et al. (2020) | 845, 40.9 | Invitation on crowdsourcing website | USA | Apr | PR |
‘When a vaccine becomes available for the coronavirus, how likely are you to get it?’ Very likely/ Likely/ Somewhat likely/ Unlikely/ Not at all likely |
9 | NA |
Yes Women were less likely to get a vaccine OR [ref. male]: 1.56 [1.02–2.39]. |
| Echoru et al. (2020) | 1,067, 26.8 | Snowball sampling technique, social media + e-mails |
West. UGA |
Jul–Sept | PP |
‘If the government of Uganda is to provide free COVID-19 vaccine, would you accept to be vaccinated?’ Yes/ No |
6* |
YR YN |
Yes Male subjects were twice as likely to accept the vaccine (OR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.56–2.71; P = 0.000). |
| Edwards et al. (2020) | 2,717, 50.0* | Weighted to have a similar distribution to the Australian population, August ANUpoll | AUS | Aug | PP |
‘The next questions ask about your views on a vaccine for COVID-19’ and then we ask ‘If a safe and effective vaccine for COVID-19 is developed, would you...’: Definitely not – Definitely (4 points) |
10 |
YR YN |
Yes Females were less likely than males to intend to get the vaccine, and more likely to be hesitant and resistant, ps < 0.05 (univariat). |
| Faasse and Newby (2020) | 2,174, 75.2 | Convenient sample, Facebook advertisement + post | AUS | Mar | PP |
Exact wording n.a. How likely it is that participants would choose to have a vaccination for the COVID-19 coronavirus, if there was a safe and effective vaccine developed: Would definitely get the vaccine/ Would probably get the vaccine/ Unsure if I would get the vaccine or not Would probably not get the vaccine/ Would definitely not get the vaccine |
7 | NA |
n.s. No demographic differences in vaccine intentions by gender (p = 0.429) |
| Fisher et al. (2020) | 991, 51.5 | Nationally representative sample, probability-based research panel AmeriSpeak | USA | Apr | PR |
‘When a vaccine for the coronavirus becomes available, will you get vaccinated?’ Yes/ Not sure/ No |
12 |
YR YN |
Yes Participant characteristics associated with a higher chance of responding ‘no’ or ‘not sure’ versus ‘yes’ were being […] female. After adjustment for differences in participant characteristics: characteristics, such as female sex […] were associated with vaccination intent but did not consistently achieve statistical significance for both response categories. |
| Gadoth et al. (2020) | 609, 68.8% | Health care workers employed by UCLA | USA | Sept–Oct | PP |
Exact wording n.a. Prospective acceptance of a novel coronavirus vaccine |
6 | NA |
n.s. p = 0.2643 OR [female]: 1.28, (0.83–1.98) |
| Grech et al. (2020a) | 128, NA |
General Practitioners & GP-trainees, e-mails from mailing list of Malta college family doctors |
MLT | Sept | PR |
‘Based on this information, how likely are you to take the COVID-19 vaccine?’ 1 (likely) – 5 (unlikely), with 3 = undecided |
8g |
YR YN |
n.s. Males were more likely to take the vaccine than females (70% vs. 54%) but this was not statistically significant. |
| Grech and Gauci (2020) | 852, NA | Students, academic & management/support staff at the University of Malta Faculties of Health Sciences, Dentistry & Medicine, e-mail via faculty secretaries | MLT | Sept | PR | See Grech, Bonnici & Zammit | 8g |
YR YN |
Yes Males were likelier to take the COVID- 19 vaccine than females (70% vs 53% respectively, chi =25.7, p < 0.001). |
| Grech et al. (2020b) | 1,002, NA | Malta’s government sector health care workers, e-mail | MLT | Sept | PR | See Grech, Bonnici & Zammit | 8g |
YR YN |
Yes Males were likelier to take the vaccine than females (chi = 13.2, p = 0.0003). |
| Grüner and Krüger (2020) | 2,077, NA | Health care studens, non-healthcare students, healthcare professionals | DEU | May–Aug | PR |
Exact wording n.a. Willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 |
4g |
YR YN |
Yes Willingness to be vaccinated higher for men than for women p = 0.1 |
| Guidry et al. (2021) | 788, 50.0 | Quotas for gender + race distribution, survey research firm | USA | Jul | PR |
‘I intend to get the COVID-19 vaccine when it becomes available.’ Strongly agree – Strongly disagree (6 point)c |
9 | NA |
Yes Men more likely to express intent to get a future COVID-19 vaccine (p = 0.003) |
| Hacquin et al. (2020) | 4,027, 52.5 | Representative sample of population, polling firm | FRA | May– Sept | PP |
Exact wording n.a. Agree to get vaccinated if a vaccine against the COVID-19 is available: Certainly/ Probably/ Probably not/ Certainly not |
11 |
YR YN |
Yes Women (39.4%) were more likely than men (34.4%, p < 0.001) to refuse the vaccine OR: 0.63 [0.54–0.72] |
| Head et al. (2020) | 3,159, 52.8 | Market research firm using US-panel of people 18+ and able to understand English | USA | May | PR |
‘How likely is it that you’ll get a COVID-19 vaccine, if it becomes available?’ Very unlikely/ Somewhat unlikely/ A little unlikely/ Neither likely nor unlikely/ A little likely / Somewhat likely /Very likely (7 point) |
10 | NA |
Yes Sex significantly associated with intent to get vaccinated (p = .013, bivariate analysis), men show higher intent. |
| Khubchandani et al. (2021) | 1,878, 52.0 | Convenient sample, crowdsourcing website, social media and other networks | USA | Jun | PR |
‘If a vaccine was available that would prevent coronavirus infection, how likely is it that you would get the vaccine/shot?’ Very likely/ Somewhat likely/ Not likely/ Definitely not |
7* |
YR YN |
UNSURE Dichotomized Chi-squared test: n.s. p = 0.81 In multiple logistic regression, females had statistically significant higher odds of vaccine hesitancy (AOR: 1.44 [1.12–1.84] |
| Kose et al. (2020) | 1,138, 72.5 | Convenient sample of health care workers, social media | TUR | Sept | PR |
‘If effective and safe vaccine is available for COVID-19, do you accept to be vaccinated with?’ Yes/ Indecisive/ No |
4 |
YR YN |
Yes Men were willing to get the vaccine. Gender associated with willingness to get vaccine, p = .001 |
| Kwok et al. (2020) | 1,205, 90.0 | Convenient sample of nurses, online self-administered | HKG | Mar–Apr | PP |
Exact wording n.a. How likely participants will take the COVID-19 vaccine when available: 0 (definitely no) – 10 (definitely yes) |
6* | NA |
n.s. OR (female): =.98 [0.68, 1.42] |
| La Vecchia et al. (2020) | 1,055, 51.8 | Nationally representative sample, market research company | ITA | Sept | PR |
Exact wording n.a. Potential COVID-19 vaccine: (Probably) Yes/ (Probably) No (4 categories) |
9 |
YR YN |
Not reported |
| Lazarus et al. (2020) | 13,426, 53.5 | Representative sample, online, telephone + mail solicitation |
BRA, CAN, CHN, ECU, FRA, […]d |
Jun | PR |
‘If a COVID-19 vaccine is proven safe and effective and is available to me, I will take it.’ Completely agree/ somewhat agree/ neutral,no opinion/ somewhat disagree/ completely disagree(5 points) |
12 | YR |
Yes Gender differences were small, but the univariate association for both questions suggested that men were slightly less likely to respond positively than women, with an OR of 0.84 (95% CI (0.78, 0.91)) of men responding positively relative to women for the general question. |
| Lin et al. (2020) | 3,541, 51.9 | Non-representative sample, social media platform | CHN | May | PR |
‘If a vaccine against COVID-19 was available on the market, would you take it?’ Definitely not/ Probably not/ Probably yes/ Definitely yes (4 point) |
9 |
YR YN |
n.s. p = 0.137 in univariable analysis |
| Loomba et al. (2020) |
4,001, 57.0 GBR 4,000, 55.0 USA |
Nationally representative sample, online panel |
GBR USA |
Sept | PP |
‘If a new coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine became available, would you accept the vaccine for yourself?’ Yes, definitely/ Unsure but leaning towards yes/ Unsure but leaning towards no/ No definitely not (4 point) |
9 |
YR YN |
Yes In both countries, females are more likely than males to refuse a COVID-19 vaccine, with a larger effect-size in the US (odds ratio 2.02, 95% percentage interval (PI): 1.78 to 2.29) than the UK (OR 1.44 [1.25, 1.63]). |
| Lucia et al. (2020) | 168, 57.0 | Medical students from one allopathic medical school in Southeast Michigan | USA | NA | PR |
Exact wording n.a. COVID-19 vaccine uptake: Vaccine Acceptance group/ Vaccine hesitant group |
5 |
YR YN |
n.s. Demographic variables were not predictive of COVID-19 vaccine uptake upon FDA approval (no statistics reported). |
| Malik et al. (2020) | 672, 57.0 | Representative sample, survey platform | USA | May | PP |
Exact wording n.a. If a COVID-19 vaccine were available and recommended for participants, would they accept it: Strongly disagree/ Disagree/ Neutral/ agree/ Strongly agree (5 points) |
10 | YR |
n.s. OR (female vs. male): 0.51–1.02 p = 0.07 |
| McAndrew and Allington (2020) |
1,663, 51.4 GBR 1,198, 51.3 USA |
Nationally representative samples, online panels |
GBR USA |
Jun | PP |
‘When a Coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine becomes available, do you think you will or will not get vaccinated?’ Definitely will get vaccinated/ Probably will get vaccinated/ Probably will not get vaccinated/ Definitely will not get vaccinated (4 points) |
12 | NA |
UNSURE UK sample: gender no significant association with COVID-19 vaccine intentions in ordinal logistic regression model results p = 0.908/0.883 US sample: female respondents more vaccine-hesitant than men p = 0.005/0.011 |
| Murphy et al. (2020) |
1,041, 51.5 IRL 2025, 51.7 GBR |
Nationally representative samples, e-mail from survey company |
IRL GBR |
Mar–Apr | PP |
‘If a new vaccine were to be developed that could prevent COVID-19, would you accept it for yourself?’ Yes/ No/ Maybe |
12 | NA |
Yes Both samples: those vaccine hesitant were more likely to be female (OR = 1.62 [1.18–2.22] IRL/ 1.43 GBR [1.14–1.80]) but not those vaccine resistant (OR = 1.24; [0.77–2.00] IRL OR = 1.05 [0.69–1.60] GBR). |
| Nzaji et al. (2020) | 613, 49.1 | Congolese Health Care Workers, recruited in several hospitals | COD | Mar– Apr | PR |
‘If a COVID-19 vaccine was available, I would have it.’ Yes/ No |
7 |
YR YN |
Yes Logistic regression model: OR (male vs. female) = 1.17 [1.15–2.60] p = 0.008 |
| Neumann-Böhme et al. (2020) | 7662, NA | Representative samples |
DNK FRA DEU ITA PRT NLD GBR |
Apr | PR |
Exact wording n.a. Willingness to get vaccinated against COVID-19 if a vaccine would be available: Willing/ Not sure/ Not wanting to get vaccinated |
5g | NA |
Yes Significantly higher proportion of men were willing to get vaccinated (77.94% vs. 70.15%, p < .001) |
| Olagoke et al. (2020) | 501, 55.29 | Sampling via crowdsourcing platform | USA | Mar | PP |
‘If there is a preventive vaccine against COVID-19, how likely are you receive the vaccine?’ 1 (extremely unlikely) – 5 (extremely likely) |
9 |
YR YN |
n.s. p = 0.0948 |
| Papagiannis et al. (2020) | 461, 74.0 | Convenient sample of health care workers, personal interview in hospitals | GRC | Feb | PR |
‘Will you be vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2?’ Yes/ Uncertain/ No |
7 | YR |
Yes There was a significant difference in gender concerning willingness to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 with more male health care workers reporting that they would be vaccinated for COVID-19 than females (58.5% vs. 39%, respectively, p = 0.001). |
| Paul et al. (2020) | 32,361, 74.9 | Well-stratified non-representative sample, panel study, networks + mailing lists | GBR | Sept–Oct | PP |
‘How likely to do you think you are to get a COVID-19 vaccine when one is approved?’ 1 (very unlikely) – 6 (very likely) |
9 |
YR YN |
Yes Groups at increased risk for uncertainty and unwillingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 were women (uncertain: RRR =1·45; 95% CI: 1·27 to 1·65; unwilling: RRR = 1·52; 95% CI: 1·24 to 1·86) |
| Perlis et al. (2020) | 19,058, 53.3 | Representative sample, sampling platform | USA | Jul | No PR |
‘If a vaccine against COVID-19 was available to you, how likely would you be to get vaccinated?’ Extremely likely/ Somewhat likely/ Neither likely nor unlikely/ Somewhat unlikely/ Extremely unlikely |
10 |
YR YN |
Yes Women (62%) were less likely to say they would pursue vaccination than men (71%). |
| Pogue et al. (2020) | 316, 49.38 | Representative sample of census data, e-mail notification through survey panel | USA | Sept | PR | ‘I am likely to be vaccinated for COVID-19 when a vaccine becomes available.’ strongly agree, somewhat agree, neither agree nor disagree, somewhat disagree, strongly disagree (5 points) | 10 |
YR YN |
n.s. |
| Prati (2020) | 624, 54.0 | Snowball sampling, social media | ITA | Apr | PR |
‘Assume that your local health authority makes freely available a vac-cine against SARS-CoV-2. Do you intend to get the vaccine?’ Yes/ Do not know/ No |
8 | NA |
n.s. Gender did not have an influence on intention to receive the vaccine Yes vs. No OR (women): 1.04 [0.51–2.13] Do not know vs. Yes OR (women): 1.15 [0.65–2.03] |
| Qiao et al. (2020) | 1,062, 79.8 | College student sample of one college in South Carolina, e-mail invitation | USA | Sept–Oct | PP |
‘How likely will you get a COVID-19 vaccine when it is available?’ 1 (definitely not take it) – 5 (definitely take it) |
6 | NA |
Yes Male college students report higher levels of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in hierarchical linear regression (p = .03). |
| Reiter et al. (2020) | 2,006, 56.0 | Convenience sample, online survey panel | USA | May | PR |
‘How willing would you be to get the COVID-19 vaccine if it was free or covered by health insurance?’ Definitely not willing/ Probably not willing/ Not sure/ Definitely willing/ Probably willing |
8 |
YR YN |
Yes Participants were less likely to be willing to get a COVID-19 vaccine if they were female. Multivariable correlates: RR = 0.91, CI: 0.87–0.96 Bivariate correlates RR: RR [female vs. male]: 0.85 (0.80–0.90) |
| Rhodes et al. (2020) | 2,018, 49.7 | Nationally representative sample of Autralian parents, part of a poll | AUS | Jun | PR |
Exact wording n.a. Accept COVID-19 vaccine: Yes/ Not sure/ No |
8 |
YR YN |
Yes OR (female vs. male): 0.63 [0.50–0.80] p < 0.001 |
| Roozenbeek et al. (2020) |
700, NA 700, NA 700, NA 1,050 + 1,150 700, NA |
Representative samples for age and gender, market research company/panel provider |
USA ESP MEX GBRe IRLf |
Apr–May | PR |
Whether participant would get vaccinated against COVID-19 if a vaccine were to become available: Yes/ No |
9 |
YR YN |
Yes Being male is associated with an increased likelihood to get vaccinated against COVID-19. |
| Salali and Uysal (2020) |
1,088, NA 3,936, NA |
Snowball sample, social media |
GBR TUR |
May | PR |
‘If a new vaccine for COVID-19 is developed, would you get yourself and, if you have any, your children vaccinated?’ Yes/ Not sure/ No |
6g | YR |
UNSURE Men in Turkey more likely to accept a COVID-19 vaccine TUR: OR 1.47 [1.26–1.71] GBR: OR 1.44 [0.99–2.1] |
| Sethi et al. (2020) | 4,884, 69.9 | Convenience sample, social media networks, national radio, news articles, Clinical Research Network website and newsletter, text messaging service of general practices | GBR | Sept–Oct | PP |
Exact wording n.a. Approved COVID-19 vaccine: Interested/ Unsure/ Not interested |
3 |
YR YN |
n.s. Males (OR = 3·47) and females (OR = 3·27) were both equally likely to take the approved vaccine. |
| Sherman et al. (2020) | 1,494, 51.0 |
Representative of general population, research panel |
GBR | Jul | PR |
‘When a coronavirus vaccination becomes available to you, how likely are you to take it?’ 0 (extremely unlikely) – 10 (extremely likely) |
12* |
YR YN |
n.s. p = .366 |
| Taylor et al. (2020) | 3,674, 43.0 | Representative sample, survey sampling company |
USA CAN |
May | PR |
‘If a vaccine for COVID-19 was available, would you get vaccinated?’ Yes/ No |
9 | NA |
UNSURE Significant but according to sample size and Cohen trivial correlation between female gender and vaccination refusal r = .10, p < 0.001 |
| Thaker (2020) | 1,040, 58.6 | Nationally representative sample, online panel | NZL | Jul | PP |
‘I intend to get vaccinated against the coronavirus.’ 1 (strongly agree) – 5 (strongly disagree) with 3 = neither agree nor disagree |
10 |
YR YN |
Yes p (of negative standardised Beta for female) < .05 |
| Thorneloe et al. (2020) | 1,149, 63.2 | Non-representative sample, social media, emails, research company | GBR | Apr–Jun | PP |
‘If a vaccine was available for COVID-19, I would want to receive it.’ Strongly disagree/ Disagree/ Neither agree nor disagree/ Agree/ Strongly agree (5 points) |
7 | YR |
n.s. Univariable analysis: OR: 0.93 [0.76–1.14], p = 0.487 Multivariable analysis: OR: 0.93 [0.72–1.21], p = 0.600 |
| Unroe et al. (2020) | 8,243, 87.2* | Representative sample for nursing home staff in Indiana, text message | USA | Nov | PR |
‘If a vaccine is approved for use by the FDA for COVID-19, will you be willing to get it as soon as it is available?’ Yes/ No |
8 |
YR YN |
Yes Male staff more willing to receive the vaccine p < .0001 |
| Vai et al. (2020) | 2,223, 69.6 | Convenience sample, advertisement by authors, universities, city social groups, social media | ITA | Feb–Mar | PR | Exact wording n.a. | 6 |
YR YN |
n.s. |
| Wang et al. (2020b) | 2,058, 54.2 | Stratified random sample representative for age and location, online survey platform | CHN | Mar | PR |
‘If a COVID-19 vaccine is successfully developed and approved for listing in the future, would you accept vaccination?’ Yes/ No |
9 |
YR YN |
Yes Among those who would accept vaccination, male (OR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.03–1.52), respondents were more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccination as soon as possible p = 0.03 |
| Wang et al. (2020a) | 806, 87.5 | Nurses, e-mail | HKG | Feb–Mar | PR |
Exact wording n.a. Whether intended to accept COVID-19 vaccination when it is available: Intend to accept/ Not intend to accept/ Undecided’ |
7 |
YR YN |
Yes In the multiple multinomial regression, […], male (adjusted odds ratio (OR): 2.78, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.69–4.58) were more likely to have intentions to accept COVID-19 vaccination […] |
| Ward et al. (2020) | 5,018, 52.4 | Representative population sample, online research panel/firm | FRA | Apr | PP |
Exact wording n.a. Respondents were asked whether they would agree to get vaccinated if a vaccine against the COVID-19 was available: Certainly/ Probably/ Probably not/ Certainly not. |
11 |
YR YN |
Yes Women were more likely to refuse the vaccine. OR vaccine refusal (men vs. women): 0.75 [0.65; 0.86] Against vaccination in general vs. acceptance: OR (male vs. female): 0.56 [0.44; 0.72], p < .001 |
| Williams et al. (2020) | 527, 57.0 | Convenience sample of participants 65 and older or chronic respiratory disease, sample recruited from previous projects | GBR | Apr | PR |
‘If a vaccine for coronavirus becomes available, would you want to receive it?’ I definitely would not want to receive it/ I probably would not want to receive it/ Unsure/ I probably would want to receive it/ I definitely would want to receive it (5 point) |
8 |
YR YN |
n.s. There were no differences between males and females, t(1, 523) = 1.45,p = .14. |
| Wong et al. (2020) | 1,159, 66.0 | Snowball sample, social media | MYS | Apr | PR |
‘If a vaccine against COVID-19 infection is available in the market, would you take it? Definitely not/ Probably not/ Yes possibly/ Yes probably/ Yes definitely (5 points) |
7 |
YR YN |
Yes […] males have greater odds of a definite intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine (OR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.11–1.87) than do females. p < .01. |
Reported Gender Differences are displayed as in the respective papers. PP, Preprint; PR, Peer-reviewed; YR, frequencies for yes vs. rest categories reported; YN frequencies for yes vs. no categories reported. *weighted data according to population characteristics. aISO 3166 Alpha-3 country code. bother Arab countries, Asian countries, EUE, NNN, SRR, AUS, NZL. cresponse categories reported differently in method and result section (6 vs. 5 points) dDEU, IND, ITA, MEX, NGA, POL, RUS, ZAF, South KOR, SGP, ESP, SWE, GBR, USA. efor the first UK sample, vaccination intention was not assessed. ffor Ireland, vaccination intention was not assessed. ggender proportion was not displayed