Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34066068›Full record

ArticleVaccines2021

Intention to Be Vaccinated for COVID-19 among Italian Nurses during the Pandemic.

Marco Trabucco Aurilio, Francesco Saverio Mennini, Simone Gazzillo, Laura Massini, Matteo Bolcato, Alessandro Feola, Cristiana Ferrari, Luca Coppeta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Drivers of COVID-19 booster uptake among nurses.American journal of infection control · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Africa: a scoping review.Global health research and policy · 2022
    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

8 authors.

Marco Trabucco AurilioDepartment of Medicine and Health Sciences "V. Tiberio", University of Molise, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2327-1455
Francesco Saverio MenniniEEHTA-CEIS, DEF Department, Faculty of Economics, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", 00133 Rome, Italy.
Simone GazzilloEEHTA-CEIS, DEF Department, Faculty of Economics, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", 00133 Rome, Italy.
Laura MassiniDepartment of Medicine and Health Sciences "V. Tiberio", University of Molise, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.
Matteo BolcatoLegal Medicine, University of Padua, Via G. Falloppio 50, 35121 Padua, Italy.
Alessandro FeolaDepartment of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Luciano Armanni 5, 80138 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9666-2636
Cristiana FerrariDepartment of Occupational Medicine, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", 00133 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2292-3338
Luca CoppetaDepartment of Occupational Medicine, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", 00133 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2470-6107

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile the COVID-19 pandemic has spread globally, health systems are overwhelmed by both direct and indirect mortality from other treatable conditions. COVID-19 vaccination was crucial to preventing and eliminating the disease, so vaccine development for COVID-19 was fast-tracked worldwide. Despite the fact that vaccination is commonly recognized as the most effective approach, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), vaccine hesitancy is a global health issue.

methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional online survey of nurses in four different regions in Italy between 20 and 28 December 2020 to obtain data on the acceptance of the upcoming COVID-19 vaccination in order to plan specific interventions to increase the rate of vaccine coverage.

resultsA total of 531 out of the 5000 nurses invited completed the online questionnaire. Most of the nurses enrolled in the study (73.4%) were female. Among the nurses, 91.5% intended to accept vaccination, whereas 2.3% were opposed and 6.2% were undecided. Female sex and confidence in vaccine efficacy represent the main predictors of vaccine intention among the study population using a logistic regression model, while other factors including vaccine safety concerns (side effects) were non-significant.

conclusionsDespite the availability of a safe and effective vaccine, intention to be vaccinated was suboptimal among nurses in our sample. We also found a significant number of people undecided as to whether to accept the vaccine. Contrary to expectations, concerns about the safety of the vaccine were not found to affect the acceptance rate; nurses' perception of vaccine efficacy and female sex were the main influencing factors on attitudes toward vaccination in our sample. Since the success of the COVID-19 immunization plan depends on the uptake rate, these findings are of great interest for public health policies. Interventions aimed at increasing employee awareness of vaccination efficacy should be promoted among nurses in order to increase the number of vaccinated people.

Indexed as

COVID-19 vaccinehealthcare workersnursepublic health ethics

Identifiers

PMID34066068
PMCPMC8151959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.