Assessing the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine lotteries: A cross-state synthetic control methods approach.
Assessing the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine lotteries: A cross-state synthetic control methods approach.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0274374
复制
发表时间：
2022
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
疫苗是对抗新冠肺炎致病致死的最有效手段。然而，在美国国内，有相当一部分人对疫苗犹豫不决，一些人是由于意识形态或伪科学动机，另一些人是因为接种疫苗的巨大感知和实际成本。考虑到疫苗的这种犹豫不决，20位州长在2021年5月12日至7月21日期间实施了某种形式的疫苗接种彩票，旨在提高低疫苗接种率。然而，在这些计划之后，这些彩票是否对疫苗接种产生了直接影响的关键问题仍然存在。以前关于公共卫生行为的财务激励的文献是一致的：财务激励显著增加了受激励的行为。然而，专门针对州疫苗彩票所做的工作范围有限，结论也参差不齐。为了帮助填补文献中的这一空白，我们使用合成控制方法分析了所有20个州，并因果地确定了18个州的彩票对首次接种和完全接种疫苗接种率的影响。在这18个州中，我们发现了强有力的证据，表明除了三个州外，所有州的彩票都对第一针疫苗接种产生了积极影响。然而，我们发现，对于完全接种疫苗，超过一半的州被分析有负面或无效的影响。我们探索了与这些混合结果相关的可能性，包括各州的总体党派之争、疫苗的犹豫不决以及他们抽奖的规模，发现这些解释中的每一种都没有效果。因此，我们得出的结论是，这些项目的设计很可能是罪魁祸首：每个州的彩票只激励第一次接种，而没有基于第二次接种的额外或或有激励。我们的发现表明，财务激励的设计对它们的成败至关重要，但通常情况下，这些项目可以在美国不同的人口、意识形态和地理背景下诱导接种疫苗的普及。
Vaccines are the most effective means at combating sickness and death caused by COVID-19. Yet, there are significant populations within the United States who are vaccine-hesitant, some due to ideological or pseudo-scientific motivations, others due to significant perceived and real costs from vaccination. Given this vaccine hesitancy, twenty state governors from May 12th to July 21st 2021 implemented some form of vaccination lottery aiming to increase low vaccination rates. In the aftermath of these programs, however, the critical question of whether these lotteries had a direct effect on vaccination remains. Previous literature on financial incentives for public health behaviors is consistent: Financial incentives significantly increase incentivized behaviors. Yet, work done specifically on state vaccine lotteries is both limited in scope and mixed in its conclusions. To help fill this gap in the literature, we use synthetic control methods to analyze all 20 states and causally identify, for eighteen states, the effects of their lotteries on both first-dose and complete vaccination rates. Within those eighteen states, we find strong evidence that all but three states’ lotteries had positive effects on first-dose vaccination. We find for complete vaccinations, however, over half the states analyzed had negative or null effects. We explore possibilities related to these mixed results including the states’ overall partisanship, vaccine hesitancy, and the size of their lotteries finding null effects for each of these explanations. Therefore, we conclude that the design of these programs is likely to blame: Every state lottery only incentivized first-doses with no additional or contingent incentive based on a second dose. Our findings suggest that the design of financial incentives is critical to their success, or failure, but generally, these programs can induce an uptake in vaccination across diverse demographic, ideological, and geographic contexts in the United States.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Kazemian S;Fuller S;Algara C
通讯作者：
Algara C
影响因子：
13.8
作者：
Acharya B;Dhakal C
通讯作者：
Dhakal C
影响因子：
3.5
作者：
Barber A;West J
通讯作者：
West J
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Green MS;Abdullah R;Vered S;Nitzan D
通讯作者：
Nitzan D
DOI：
10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113638
发表时间：
2021-03
期刊：
Social science & medicine (1982)
影响因子：
--
作者：
Callaghan T;Moghtaderi A;Lueck JA;Hotez P;Strych U;Dor A;Fowler EF;Motta M
通讯作者：
Motta M