ReviewEnfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica (English ed.)2020
The vaccine against COVID-19 and institutional trust.
Review in Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica (English ed.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immunity Awareness-Strategies to Improve the Degree of Acceptance of Vaccines: A Systematic Review.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Latin American Scientific Production on COVID-19 Vaccines.Ethiopian journal of health sciences · 2022Article
- The lived experiences of a COVID-19 immunization programme: vaccine hesitancy and vaccine refusal.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Hesitation about coronavirus vaccines in healthcare professionals and general population in Spain.PloS one · 2022Article
- Design and Cross-Cultural Invariance of the COVID-19 Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs Scale (COVID-VCBS) in 13 Latin American Countries.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- [Health Technology Assessment (HTA) of the introduction of influenza vaccination for Italian children with Fluenz TetraJournal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Major public and private laboratories have entered into a race to find an effective COVID-19 vaccine. When that vaccine arrives, the governments will have to implement vaccination programs to achieve the necessary immunization levels to prevent the disease transmission. In this context, the ethical dilemma of compulsory vaccination vs. voluntary vaccination will be raised. Underlying this dilemma, lies the problem of the ethical models on which the political decisions of governments in matters of health are based. The article proposes and argues the need to base health policy decisions on an ethical «first person» model, based on responsibility, that allows us to move from a normative ethic to an ethic of responsible behavior. This change in the ethical model, together with certain proposals for political action, will help us to restore institutional trust so that the necessary levels of collective immunity against COVID-19 can be achieved through the voluntary vaccination of the citizens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.