Next Article in Journal
Estimation of Real-World Vaccination Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines against Delta and Omicron Variants in Japan
Previous Article in Journal
COVID-19 Vaccination among Czech Dentists
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Vaccines
Volume 10
Issue 3
10.3390/vaccines10030429
Review Report
vaccines-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Public Reaction towards the Potential Side Effects of a COVID-19 Vaccine: An Italian Cross-Sectional Study

Vaccines 2022, 10(3), 429; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10030429
by Serena Barello 1,2,3, Lorenzo Palamenghi 1,2,4,* and Guendalina Graffigna 1,2,4
Reviewer 1:
Jonathan D. Karp
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Vaccines 2022, 10(3), 429; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10030429
Submission received: 9 February 2022 / Revised: 9 March 2022 / Accepted: 10 March 2022 / Published: 11 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Section COVID-19 Vaccines and Vaccination)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

See attached pdf for comments specific to this manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Q1. Introduction, lines 23-40. One of the main problem of those days was the absence of a causality assessment that would have justified the suspension (or not) of the vaccine. Please revise

Q2. Introduction, lines 64-73. Please cite this Italian study https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35107123/

Q3. Methods, line 134. It is not clear to me how did you weight the data to reach the desired quotas

Q4. Conclusions. Please add a small paragraph on vaccine hesitancy in subgroups of population, as healthcare workers,  and its impact on vaccination campaign

Author Response

Thank you for your feedbacks. We have addressed the issues you kindly pointed out.

Q1: added a statement to clarify this important aspect

Q2: this reference was not included at first since the article was published only a few days before the submission of this manuscript. However, given its relevance for our paper, we have included it, thank you for pointing it out

Q3: sampling weights is a strategy employed to make sure that quotas form a planned stratified sampling are reached. In fact, due to non-response and self-selection bias, stratified sampling oftentimes fails to reach the exact desired quotas: weighting compensates for this by assigning to each subject a value which is the reciprocal of the likelihood of being sampled. In our case, sampling weights were provided by the panel provider which was in charge of the stratified sample. We have added a sentence to methods to make sure that readers understand how sampling weights work.

Q4: we have revised our discussion to include further details on vaccine hesitancy in different population subgroups

 

Back to TopTop