» Articles » PMID: 36183087

Psychometric Validation of a Chinese Version of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale: a Cross-sectional Study

Overview
Journal BMC Infect Dis
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2022 Oct 1
PMID 36183087
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: COVID-19 vaccines have been administered in many countries; however, a sufficient vaccine coverage rate is not guaranteed due to vaccine hesitancy. To improve the uptake rate of COVID-19 vaccine, it is essential to evaluate the rate of vaccine hesitancy and explore relevant factors in different populations. An urgent need is to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among different population groups, hence a validated scale for measuring COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is necessary. The present study aims to validate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale among different populations in China and to provide a scale measuring COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy with satisfactory reliability and validity.

Methods: Self-reported survey data were collected from different populations in China from January to March 2021. Based on the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines scale, 15 items were adapted to evaluate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were utilized to identify internal constructs of the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale among two randomly split subsets of the overall sample. Reliability was analyzed with the internal consistency, composite reliability, and the test-retest reliability, and validity was analyzed with the criterion validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.

Results: A total of 4227 participants completed the survey, with 62.8% being medical workers, 17.8% being students, 10.3% being general population, and 9.1% being public health professionals. The exploratory factor analysis revealed a three-factor structure that explain 50.371% of the total variance. The confirmatory factor analysis showed that models consisting of three dimensions constructed in different populations had good or acceptable fit (CFI ranged from 0.902 to 0.929, RMSEA ranged from 0.061 to 0.069, and TLI ranged from 0.874 to 0.912). The Cronbach's α for the total scale and the three subscales was 0.756, 0.813, 0.774 and 0.705, respectively. Moreover, the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale had adequate test-retest reliability, criterion validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.

Conclusions: The COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale is a valid and reliable scale for identifying COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among different population groups in China. Given the serious consequences of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, future studies should validate it across regions and time to better understand the application of the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale.

Citing Articles

Uptake and hesitancy of the second booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine among the general population in China after the surge period of the COVID-19 pandemic: a large-scale national study.

Liu X, Xin Y, Zhang L, Wu Y, Jing S, Dai Z BMC Public Health. 2025; 25(1):503.

PMID: 39920639 PMC: 11803999. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-025-21691-x.


Understanding the psychological pathways to translation technology competence: emotional intelligence, self-esteem, and innovation capability among EFL students.

Zhao J, Li X, Wei J, Long X, Gao Z BMC Psychol. 2025; 13(1):66.

PMID: 39856774 PMC: 11761763. DOI: 10.1186/s40359-025-02400-0.


Association between COVID-19 anxiety syndrome and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the postpandemic era: a cross-sectional study in Hong Kong.

Wu T, Ho J, Choi S, Chan Y, Chan B, Li T BMC Public Health. 2025; 25(1):155.

PMID: 39810174 PMC: 11734546. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-025-21367-6.


Emotional design for pro-environmental life: Visual appeal and user interactivity influence sustainable consumption intention with moderating effect of positive emotion.

Feng Y, Zhao L Heliyon. 2024; 10(19):e38521.

PMID: 39398056 PMC: 11471219. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38521.


A Parent Version of the Motors of COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance Scale for Assessing Parents' Motivation to Have Their Children Vaccinated.

Lin C, Hsiao R, Chen Y, Yen C Vaccines (Basel). 2023; 11(7).

PMID: 37515008 PMC: 10385549. DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11071192.


References
1.
Gonzalez-Block M, Gutierrez-Calderon E, Pelcastre-Villafuerte B, Arroyo-Laguna J, Comes Y, Crocco P . Influenza vaccination hesitancy in five countries of South America. Confidence, complacency and convenience as determinants of immunization rates. PLoS One. 2020; 15(12):e0243833. PMC: 7732123. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243833. View

2.
Freeman D, Loe B, Yu L, Freeman J, Chadwick A, Vaccari C . Effects of different types of written vaccination information on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK (OCEANS-III): a single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Public Health. 2021; 6(6):e416-e427. PMC: 8116130. DOI: 10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00096-7. View

3.
Qunaibi E, Helmy M, Basheti I, Sultan I . A high rate of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a large-scale survey on Arabs. Elife. 2021; 10. PMC: 8205489. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.68038. View

4.
Opel D, Taylor J, Mangione-Smith R, Solomon C, Zhao C, Catz S . Validity and reliability of a survey to identify vaccine-hesitant parents. Vaccine. 2011; 29(38):6598-605. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.06.115. View

5.
Kestenbaum L, Feemster K . Identifying and addressing vaccine hesitancy. Pediatr Ann. 2015; 44(4):e71-5. PMC: 4475845. DOI: 10.3928/00904481-20150410-07. View