Evaluating Preferences and the Effect of Altruism on COVID-19 Vaccine Decisions: A Discrete Choice Experiment
Author(s)
Kelley M1, Drabo EF2, Gong CL3
1University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, Baltimore, MD, USA, 3Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: To elucidate how Americans value COVID-19 vaccine characteristics, and determine whether their willingness to vaccinate is altered by the framing of the vaccination decision as altruistic or not. METHODS: We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) with Amazon MTurk participants randomized into a control group with standard DCE questions, versus a treatment group with questions framed altruistically. The survey consisted of demographic questions, an altruism index, and a DCE of 12 choice tasks with 3 profiles (Vaccine A, Vaccine B, and No Vaccination). Vaccine attributes included number of doses, efficacy in preventing infection, risk of severe disease, severe side effect type, risk of severe side effect, and subsidy. We estimated preference weights using multinomial logit models, controlling for framing, sex, age, political party, health status, race/ethnicity, and altruism score. RESULTS: Sample included 2,014 respondents (control with no framing, n=1,037; altruism framing, n=977). Respondents preferred COVID-19 vaccines with allergic reactions vs neurological disorder as side effects (OR: 1.32; P <0.01), higher efficacy (OR: 1.03; P < 0.01), higher subsidies (OR: 1.00; P < 0.01), lower risk of side effects (OR: 0.99; P < 0.01), and lower risk of severe disease (OR: 0.99; P < 0.01). Preferences for single- vs double-dose formulations did not significantly differ (P > 0.01). Respondents with higher baseline altruism scores were more likely to prefer vaccination compared to those with lower altruism scores (RR: 1.83; P < 0.01). However, framing neither significantly affected preferences for vaccination nor modified the effect of baseline altruism on these preferences for vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Preferences were strongest for vaccines with less severe side effects, suggesting that innovators should prioritize COVID-19 vaccines with these characteristics. More altruistic individuals were more likely to vaccinate, but framing did not modulate vaccination decisions, implying its limited nudging effects for vaccination.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2021-11, ISPOR Europe 2021, Copenhagen, Denmark
Value in Health, Volume 24, Issue 12, S2 (December 2021)
Acceptance Code
P20
Topic
Epidemiology & Public Health, Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Public Health, Stated Preference & Patient Satisfaction
Disease
Infectious Disease (non-vaccine)