Manh-Hung Nguyen, Viet-Ngu Hoang, Son Nghiem, Lan Anh Nguyen
{"title":"The Dynamic and Heterogeneous Effects of COVID-19 Vaccination Mandates in the USA.","authors":"Manh-Hung Nguyen, Viet-Ngu Hoang, Son Nghiem, Lan Anh Nguyen","doi":"10.1002/hec.4923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mandatory vaccination for COVID-19 has received intense political and ethical debates, while the literature on the causal effects of vaccination mandates on vaccination outcomes is very limited. In this study, we examine the effects of the announcement of vaccine mandates (VMs) for workers working in three sectors, including health, education, and state governments, on the uptake of first-dose and second-dose vaccination across 50 states in the United States of America. We show that VM announcements have heterogeneous effects; hence, standard two-way fixed effects and difference-in-differences estimators are biased. We present evidence for the heterogeneous treatment effects in single and two-treatment settings. In the setting of a single treatment, when treating all VM announcements equally, our results show that VM announcement was associated with an increase of 20.6% first-dose uptake from 1 July to 31 August 2021. In two-treatment settings, our results suggest that VM announcements for workers in health or state government sectors have significant causal effects on first-dose vaccination. Additionally, VM announcements do not have significant causal effects on second-dose uptake. Our results are robust to the choice of differing outcome variables and periods after controlling for state-level covariates, including COVID-19 death, unemployment, and cumulative two-dose vaccination.</p>","PeriodicalId":12847,"journal":{"name":"Health economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4923","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Mandatory vaccination for COVID-19 has received intense political and ethical debates, while the literature on the causal effects of vaccination mandates on vaccination outcomes is very limited. In this study, we examine the effects of the announcement of vaccine mandates (VMs) for workers working in three sectors, including health, education, and state governments, on the uptake of first-dose and second-dose vaccination across 50 states in the United States of America. We show that VM announcements have heterogeneous effects; hence, standard two-way fixed effects and difference-in-differences estimators are biased. We present evidence for the heterogeneous treatment effects in single and two-treatment settings. In the setting of a single treatment, when treating all VM announcements equally, our results show that VM announcement was associated with an increase of 20.6% first-dose uptake from 1 July to 31 August 2021. In two-treatment settings, our results suggest that VM announcements for workers in health or state government sectors have significant causal effects on first-dose vaccination. Additionally, VM announcements do not have significant causal effects on second-dose uptake. Our results are robust to the choice of differing outcome variables and periods after controlling for state-level covariates, including COVID-19 death, unemployment, and cumulative two-dose vaccination.
期刊介绍:
This Journal publishes articles on all aspects of health economics: theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy from the economic perspective. Its scope includes the determinants of health and its definition and valuation, as well as the demand for and supply of health care; planning and market mechanisms; micro-economic evaluation of individual procedures and treatments; and evaluation of the performance of health care systems.
Contributions should typically be original and innovative. As a rule, the Journal does not include routine applications of cost-effectiveness analysis, discrete choice experiments and costing analyses.
Editorials are regular features, these should be concise and topical. Occasionally commissioned reviews are published and special issues bring together contributions on a single topic. Health Economics Letters facilitate rapid exchange of views on topical issues. Contributions related to problems in both developed and developing countries are welcome.