ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2025
Vaccine attitudes, practices, and literacy among New York State primary care providers and their office personnel.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2025. 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.
- 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Consistency of the healthcare delivery team's communication to families is influential in vaccine decision-making. We aim to describe personal vaccine practices, attitudes, and literacy among New York State primary care office providers and personnel. We disseminated an anonymous survey to providers and office personnel (including but not limited to front office staff, medical assistance, nurses, advanced practice providers, and physicians) of 12 primary care practices between May and July 2023. Responses were assessed using chi-square tests, t-tests, and one way ANOVA tests to compare categorical variables, the means between two groups, and means across multiple groups, respectively. 216 respondents completed the survey. 25/213 (12%) and 16/147 (11%) reported declining routinely recommended vaccine(s) for themselves or for their child(ren), respectively, most commonly the COVID-19 and/or influenza vaccines. Less than three-quarters of respondents strongly agreed with the following statements: vaccines are safe to administer to children (149/214, 70%), vaccines are safe to administer to adolescents (149/213, 70%), and vaccines are effective in preventing disease (146/213, 69%). In total, 149/213 (70%) and 89/211 (42%) of respondents report that parents express concerns to them about vaccines in the clinic and outside of the practice setting, respectively, yet just over half of the respondents (116/210, 55%) report strong agreement with being comfortable having vaccine conversations with parents. Vaccine hesitancy exists across all healthcare team roles. Practice-wide education regarding vaccine safety, efficacy and importance and strategies for communicating about vaccines with patients and families is needed to improve vaccine confidence among the healthcare teams and 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.