ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2021
A global bibliometric analysis of research productivity on vaccine hesitancy from 1974 to 2019.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Willingness, refusal and influential factors of parents to vaccinate their children against the COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Preventive medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Mapping inequities in global vaccine sentiment research.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Challenges and opportunities in current vaccine technology and administration: A comprehensive survey examining oral vaccine potential in the United States.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- COVID-19 vaccination coverage among healthcare workers in obstetrics and gynecology during the first three months of vaccination campaign: a cross-sectional study in Jiangsu province, China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
- Real-World Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccines among Healthcare Workers in Perinatal Medicine in China.Vaccines · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vaccine hesitancy is a phenomenon where individuals delay or refuse to take some or all vaccines. The objective of this study was to conduct a global bibliometric analysis of research productivity and identify country level indicators that could be associated with publications on vaccine hesitancy. We searched PubMed and Web of Science for publications from 1974 to 2019, and selected articles focused on behavioral and social aspects of vaccination. Data on country-level indicators were obtained from the World Bank. We used Spearman's correlation and zero-inflated negative-binomial regression models to ascertain the association between country level indicators and the number of publications. We identified 4314 articles, with 1099 eligible for inclusion. The United States of America (461 publications, 41.9%), Canada (84 publications, 7.6%) and the United Kingdom (68 publications, 6.2%) had the highest number of publications. Although various country indicators had significant correlations with vaccine hesitancy publications, only gross domestic product (GDP) and gross national income (GNI) per capita were independent positive predictors of the number of publications. When the number of publications were standardized by GDP, the Gambia, Somalia and Malawi ranked highest in decreasing order. The United States, Canada and United Kingdom ranked highest (in that order) when standardized by current health expenditure. Overall, high-income countries were more productive in vaccine hesitancy research than low-and-middle-income countries. There is a need for more investment in research on vaccine hesitancy in low-and-middle-income countries.
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.