Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33930855›Full record

ArticleDiabetes & metabolic syndrome

Development and validation of a questionnaire to assess knowledge, attitude, practices, and concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccination among the general population.

Archana Kumari, Piyush Ranjan, Sakshi Chopra, Divjyot Kaur, Ashish Datt Upadhyay, Tanveer Kaur, Arunangshu Bhattacharyya, Mehak Arora, Hardik Gupta, Arnav Thrinath and 2 more

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes & metabolic syndrome. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  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. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

12 authors.

Archana KumariDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi, India.
Piyush RanjanDepartment of Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi, India. Electronic address: drpiyushdost@gmail.com.
Sakshi ChopraDepartment of Home Science, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India.
Divjyot KaurDepartment of Home Science, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India.
Ashish Datt UpadhyayDepartment of Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi, India.
Tanveer KaurDepartment of Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi, India.
Arunangshu BhattacharyyaAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Mehak AroraAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Hardik GuptaAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Arnav ThrinathAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Bindu PrakashDepartment of Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi, India.
Naval K VikramDepartment of Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsThere seems to be hesitation in the general population in accepting COVID 19 vaccine because of associated myths and/or misinformation. This study is dedicated to develop and validate a tool to interpret vaccine acceptance and/or hesitancy by assessing the knowledge, attitude, practices, and concerns regarding the COVID vaccine. MATERIAL AND

methodsMixed methods study design was used. In phase 1, the questionnaire was developed through literature review, focus group discussion, expert evaluation, and pre-testing. In phase 2, the validity of the questionnaire was obtained by conducting a cross-sectional survey on 201 participants. The construct validity was established via principal component analysis. Cronbach's alpha value was used to assess the reliability of the questionnaire.

resultsThe 39-item questionnaire to assess the knowledge, attitude, practices, and concerns regarding the COVID-19 vaccine was developed. The Cronbach's alpha value of the questionnaire was 0.86 suggesting a good internal consistency.

conclusionThe developed tool is valid to assess the knowledge, attitude, practices and concerns regarding the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and/or hesitancy. It has the potential utility for healthcare workers and government authorities to further build vaccine literacy.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeSurveys and QuestionnairesVaccinationCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHealth LiteracyHumansPandemicsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePerceptionPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19 VaccinesAcceptanceConcernsCOVID-19HesitancyKAPPandemicQuestionnaireVaccine

Identifiers

PMID33930855
PMCPMC8056878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.