Sprengholz Philipp, Korn Lars, Eitze Sarah, Betsch Cornelia
Media and Communication Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany
Media and Communication Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany.
J Med Ethics. 2021 May 10. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2021-107339.
As vaccines against COVID-19 are scarce, many countries have developed vaccination prioritisation strategies focusing on ethical and epidemiological considerations. However, public acceptance of such strategies should be monitored to ensure successful implementation. In an experiment with =1379 German participants, we investigated whether the public's vaccination allocation preferences matched the prioritisation strategy approved by the German government. Results revealed different allocations. While the government had top-prioritised vulnerable people (being of high age or accommodated in nursing homes for the elderly), participants preferred exclusive allocation of the first available vaccines to medical staff and personnel caring for the elderly. Interestingly, allocation preferences did not change when participants were told how many individuals were included in each group. As differences between allocation policies and public preferences can affect trust in the government and threaten the social contract between generations, we discuss possible strategies to align vaccination prioritisations.
由于针对新冠病毒的疫苗稀缺,许多国家制定了疫苗接种优先级策略,这些策略侧重于伦理和流行病学方面的考量。然而,应该监测公众对这些策略的接受程度,以确保其成功实施。在一项有1379名德国参与者的实验中,我们调查了公众的疫苗分配偏好是否与德国政府批准的优先级策略相符。结果显示了不同的分配情况。虽然政府将弱势群体(高龄者或住在养老院的老年人)列为最高优先级,但参与者更倾向于将首批可用疫苗专门分配给医护人员和照顾老年人的人员。有趣的是,当参与者被告知每组中有多少人时,分配偏好并没有改变。由于分配政策与公众偏好之间的差异可能会影响对政府的信任,并威胁代际之间的社会契约,我们讨论了使疫苗接种优先级保持一致的可能策略。