Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33118868›Full record

ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2021

Assessing COVID-19 vaccine literacy: a preliminary online survey.

Luigi Roberto Biasio, Guglielmo Bonaccorsi, Chiara Lorini, Sergio Pecorelli

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05582746 (Localized mHealth Approach to Boosting COVID-19 Testing and Vaccine Literacy, Access, and Uptake Among Women With Criminal Legal System Involvement), which is not on this map. Cited by 140 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
140citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
25.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT05582746 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Localized mHealth Approach to Boosting COVID-19 Testing and Vaccine Literacy, Access, and Uptake Among Women With Criminal Legal System Involvement

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Kansas Medical CenterRan2022 to 2024Enrolled295ConditionsCOVID-19 PandemicArmsTri-City COVID Attitudes Study
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

140 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 276 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Vaccine Literacy and Vaccination: A Systematic Review.International journal of public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

80 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Luigi Roberto BiasioGiovanni Lorenzini Foundation, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8932-0411
Guglielmo BonaccorsiDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5171-4308
Chiara LoriniDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3170-1857
Sergio PecorelliGiovanni Lorenzini Foundation, Milan, Italy.
University of Florence · ITGiovanni Armenise-Harvard Foundation · USIntravacc (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 infodemic can be countered by scientific evidence, clear and consistent communication, and improved health literacy of both individuals in need of information and those providing it. A rapid online survey was carried out to evaluate vaccine literacy (VL) skills in the general population and perceptions about COVID-19 vaccine candidates, along with behavior and beliefs about current vaccinations. Observed VL levels were consistent with previous observations - where comparable self-reported tools were administered face-to-face and by paper-and-pencil - the mean functional score being = 2.92, while the interactive-critical score was = 3.27, out of a maximum of 4. Perceptions regarding future COVID-19 vaccines, along with beliefs about vaccination, were mostly positive and significantly associated with functional and interactive-critical VL scales. Despite limitations, the study confirms that surveys via the web are a suitable method to evaluate and track attitudes during infectious disease outbreaks and assess health literacy skills about vaccination, which can be useful to adapt medical communication strategies, for a better understanding of the value of immunization.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeInternetSurveys and QuestionnairesVaccinationAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedSARS-CoV-2COVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19Online SurveysVaccine Literacy; Vaccination Beliefs

Identifiers

PMID33118868
PMCPMC8078752
OpenAlexW3045416495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.