ArticleBMC primary care2024
When clinicians and patients disagree on vaccination: what primary care clinicians can learn from COVID-19-vaccine-hesitant patients about communication, trust, and relationships in healthcare.
Article in BMC primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Cluster Randomized Trial of a Vaccination Communication Educational Intervention: Impact on COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Veterans.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Trial
- Partisan differences in healthcare decision-making: Evidence from a vaccine experiment.PloS one · 2026Article
- Factors contributing to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Veterans later in the pandemic.BMC public health · 2025Article
- "I think of it as planting seeds": challenging patient-provider discussions about COVID-19 vaccination: a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn the United States, discourse on COVID-19 vaccination has become polarized, and the positions of public health officials are met with skepticism by many vaccine-hesitant Americans. This polarization may impact future vaccination efforts as well as clinician-patient relationships.
methodsWe interviewed 77 vaccine-hesitant patients and 41 clinicians about COVID-19 vaccination communication in primary care as part of a Veterans Affairs (VA) trial evaluating a vaccine-communication intervention. This paper reports the findings of a qualitative analysis focused on one aspect of those interviews-the disconnect between primary care clinicians' and patients' perceptions about COVID-19 vaccination communication and decision-making.
resultsRapid qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews revealed fundamental differences in how clinicians and patients understood and described the reasoning, values, and concerns underlying COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. These differences were significant and value-laden; they included negative judgments that could undermine communication between clinicians and patients and, over time, erode trust and empathy.
conclusionWe advocate for empathic listening and suggest communication strategies to bridge the divide between clinicians and vaccine-hesitant patients.
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.