ArticleFrontiers in public health2023
Adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare professionals working in Ethiopia: a facility-based cross-sectional study.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background of the study: One of the best medical approaches for halting the spread of infectious diseases is vaccination. During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers (HCWs) were a high-risk population. Due to their susceptibility in terms of their working environment, front-line healthcare personnel should receive vaccinations before others. Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines among Ethiopian healthcare professionals in 2022. Methods: A facility-based cross-sectional study design was conducted in Addis Ababa Health Facilities, Ethiopia. A total of 290 health professionals who were vaccinated during the study period were involved. Data entry was done by Epidata (version 3.1) and analyzed using SPSS software version 26. Bivariable analysis was conducted and a Results: A total of 277 study participants were successfully involved in the study, yielding a response rate of 95.5%. The study participants comprised 123 (44.4%) women and 154 (55.6%) men. The majority of them (202, 72.9%) had received the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine. Among the 277 study participants, 142 (51.3%) had developed adverse reactions associated with vaccination. Of these, 81 (29.2%) had moderate adverse reactions. Only 2 (0.7%) had developed adverse reactions that led to hospitalization. The most reported short-term adverse reactions were injection site pain (151, 54.5%), headache (114, 41.2%), fever (104, 37.5%), fatigability and tiredness (94, 33.9%), chills (92, 33.2%), muscle pain (79, 28.5%), and decreased sleep quality (34, 12.3%). The multivariable logistic regression showed that the odds of having an adverse reaction were 1.501 times higher among women than men (AOR = 1.501, 95% CI [1.08, 2.754]). Conclusion and recommendations: This study revealed that adverse effects following the COVID-19 vaccine were moderate in magnitude and minimal in severity. This study showed that adverse reactions that led to hospitalization were rare. Based on the findings of this study, it is recommended that national, multicenter, prospective, and randomized studies be conducted to assess the independent association of each vaccine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.