Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38930582›Full record

ArticleMicroorganisms2024

Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Cross-Sectional Study in Three Communities in the United States and Lebanon.

Mohamad Yasmin, Mohamad Ali Tfaily, Rayyan Wazzi Mkahal, Rita Obeid, Rebecca P Emery, Habiba Hassouna, Mudita Bhugra, Robert A Bonomo, Zeina A Kanafani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microorganisms, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Mohamad YasminLouis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA.
Mohamad Ali TfailyDepartment of Internal Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.
Rayyan Wazzi MkahalFaculty of Medicine and the Medical Center, American University of Beirut, Cairo Street, Riad El Solh, Beirut 1107 2020, Lebanon.
Rita ObeidDepartment of Internal Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA.
Rebecca P EmerySpectrum Health, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, Grand Rapids, MI 49503, USA.
Habiba HassounaSpectrum Health, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, Grand Rapids, MI 49503, USA.
Mudita BhugraDepartment of Internal Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA.
Robert A BonomoLouis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA.
Zeina A KanafaniFaculty of Medicine and the Medical Center, American University of Beirut, Cairo Street, Riad El Solh, Beirut 1107 2020, Lebanon.ORCID 0000-0001-8814-1286

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic underscores the significance of vaccine hesitancy in shaping vaccination outcomes. Understanding the factors underpinning COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy is crucial for tailoring effective vaccination strategies. This cross-sectional study, conducted in three communities across the United States and Lebanon, employed surveys to assess respondents' knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding COVID-19 infection and vaccination. Among the 7196 participants, comprising 6775 from the US and 422 from Lebanon, vaccine hesitancy rates were comparable at 12.2% and 12.8%, respectively. Notably, a substantial proportion of respondents harbored misconceptions, such as attributing the potential to alter DNA (86.4%) or track individuals (92.8%) to COVID-19 vaccines and believing in the virus's artificial origins (81%). US participants had more misconceptions about the COVID-19 vaccine, such as altering DNA or causing infertility. Lebanese participants were more likely to question the origins of the virus and the speed of vaccine development. Additionally, US respondents were less worried about infection, while Lebanese respondents were more indecisive but less likely to outright reject the vaccine. Primary determinants of hesitancy included perceptions that the vaccine poses a greater risk than the infection itself (aOR = 8.7 and 9.4, respectively) and negative recommendations from healthcare providers (aOR = 6.5 and 5.4, respectively). Conversely, positive endorsements from healthcare providers were associated with reduced hesitancy (aOR = 0.02 and 0.4, respectively). Targeting healthcare providers to dispel misinformation and elucidate COVID-19 vaccine risks holds promise for enhancing vaccination uptake.

Indexed as

COVID-19pandemicsurveyvaccinationvaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID38930582
PMCPMC11205586

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.