Next Article in Journal
Insights into In Vitro Adaptation of EV71 and Analysis of Reduced Virulence by In Silico Predictions
Previous Article in Journal
COVID-19 Vaccination during Pregnancy and Lactation: Attitudes and Uptakes before and after Official Recommendations in Germany
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Vaccines
Volume 11
Issue 3
10.3390/vaccines11030628
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

Examining an Altruism-Eliciting Video Intervention to Increase COVID-19 Vaccine Intentions in Younger Adults: A Qualitative Assessment Using the Realistic Evaluation Framework

Vaccines 2023, 11(3), 628; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11030628
by Patricia Zhu 1,*, Ovidiu Tatar 1,2, Ben Haward 1, Veronica Steck 3, Gabrielle Griffin-Mathieu 1, Samara Perez 4,5, Ève Dubé 6, Gregory Zimet 7 and Zeev Rosberger 1,3,4,8
Reviewer 1:
Kenneth C. Land
Reviewer 3:
Suyanto Suyanto
Vaccines 2023, 11(3), 628; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11030628
Submission received: 12 February 2023 / Revised: 3 March 2023 / Accepted: 6 March 2023 / Published: 11 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Section COVID-19 Vaccines and Vaccination)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper reports on a qualitative focus-group study of the impacts of an altruism-eliciting video on COVID-19 vaccination intentions. The paper is well-written, the study design and analysis follow state-of-the-art research protocols, and the findings are interesting and useful.

The one suggestion I have for revision of the manuscript is that the text of the paper in the Study strengths and limitations should include mention of the relatively limited sizes of the focus groups and the use of the remote access Zoom tool for the group interactions. It is not anticipated that larger, in-person focus groups would lead to greatly different views, but it would be good to study this in future sessions. 

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper is an intresting piece of work , using qualitative research methodology  on the field of Covid-19 vaccine.

There are a few minors questions

Please define or explain what "prosocial behavior" is so that unfamiliar readers can understand it.

Line 124 change  omit $ , because is redundant (CAD means Canadian Dollars) see Canada Government web pages.

https://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tcdnstyl-chap?lang=eng&lettr=indx_catlog&info0=5.11&info1=5.26

Please provide a linkt to the video that was used. (or include it as supplementary material) that will allow a better understanding of the context of the study.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

I have reviewed  very interesting manuscript with important findings.  Overall, the manuscript is very well-written; The rich value of qualitative study is the deep discussion from comparing result obtained from several data collection methods as various sources. Just simple question, do you use the triangulation process in validating process? I think you can explain that in the paper. 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop