ArticleCureus2024
Determinants of Parental Vaccine Hesitancy During the COVID-19 Era in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Despite the success of childhood vaccination in reducing vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs), vaccine hesitancy remains a significant challenge in several countries, such as Saudi Arabia, both during and beyond the COVID-19 era. Furthermore, the pandemic may have impacted vaccine hesitancy trends, potentially affecting parents' intentions to adhere to scheduled childhood vaccination programs. Aim This article aims to assess the extent of parents' hesitancy toward childhood vaccination, determine if it increased or decreased due to the COVID-19 pandemic, highlight the factors and determinants that influenced this hesitancy, whether positively or negatively, during the COVID-19 era, and estimate the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination in relation to the acceptance of scheduled childhood vaccination. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in Saudi Arabia through a snowball sampling technique. Data were collected between September 2022 and October 2022 using an online survey using Google Forms. The inclusion criteria were parents or guardians in Saudi Arabia with a child up to 18 years of age. Responses were analyzed using SPSS V25 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, US), with chi-square tests and logistic regression performed to compare hesitancy and vaccination status. Results Among the 1,209 parents and care providers who participated, the prevalence of parents' vaccine hesitancy was 374 (30.9%). The educational level of the parents was not significantly associated with hesitancy status (p 0.490). The most refused vaccine was Mpox (345; 28.5%), whereas the one that caused the most hesitancy was the COVID-19 vaccine (352; 29.1%). Regarding the parents' concerns, the main reason for their hesitancy was the influence of their negative perceptions from social media content, including false or misleading information and negative allegations about vaccines, reported by 449 (18.98%) of the participants. Logistic regression analysis indicated that negative social media perceptions significantly increased the likelihood of vaccine hesitancy (OR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.78-2.60, p < 0.001). Conclusion Our study highlights the prevalence of parental vaccine hesitancy during the COVID-19 era; the most significant hesitancy was observed toward the COVID-19 vaccine, and the mpox vaccine was the most rejected. Negative social media was the main reason for parental hesitancy; public health efforts should focus on providing accurate and easily accessible information through educational campaigns on social media and other platforms.
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.