Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34358132›Full record

ReviewVaccines2021

Healthcare Providers' Vaccine Perceptions, Hesitancy, and Recommendation to Patients: A Systematic Review.

Cheryl Lin, Jewel Mullen, Danielle Smith, Michaela Kotarba, Samantha J Kaplan, Pikuei Tu

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Vaccines, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 139 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
139citing papers in PubMed, 9 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

139 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Understanding Primary Care Physician Vaccination Behaviour: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

79 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

6 authors.

Cheryl LinPolicy and Organizational Management Program, Duke University, Durham, NC 27705, USA.
Jewel MullenDell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA.
Danielle SmithPolicy and Organizational Management Program, Duke University, Durham, NC 27705, USA.
Michaela KotarbaPolicy and Organizational Management Program, Duke University, Durham, NC 27705, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9934-8231
Samantha J KaplanMedical Center Library and Archives, Duke University, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Pikuei TuPolicy and Organizational Management Program, Duke University, Durham, NC 27705, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite vaccines' effectiveness in reducing the rate of preventable diseases, vaccine hesitancy has threatened public health and economies worldwide. Healthcare providers' (HCP) communications and behavior strongly influence patient receptivity and uptake. The goal of this review was to examine HCP vaccine perceptions, knowledge, and reservations and how these attitudes affect their recommendations and vaccination practices. Primary research studies published by 16 September 2020 were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. A 14-item scale was developed for survey study and risk of bias appraisal (SSRBA). In total, 96 papers from 34 countries were included, covering 17 vaccines (HPV and influenza vaccines the most studied). Recommendation was positively associated with provider knowledge and experience, beliefs about disease risk, and perceptions of vaccine safety, necessity, and efficacy. HCP vaccination attitudes and practices varied across specialties, vaccines, and countries; demographic impact was inconclusive. Barriers included anticipation of patient/parental concerns or refusal, lacking clear guidelines, time constraints, and cost. For HPV, vaccines were more often recommended to older, female adolescents and by physicians who discussed sexual health. HCPs are vital advocates for patients and the public, but studies indicated a prevalence of provider hesitancy pertaining to inadequate knowledge, low vaccine confidence, and suboptimal uptake themselves. Improving HCP knowledge and assuring their access to information they deem trustworthy are essential to supporting HCPs' role as "trusted messengers" to promote vaccine acceptance.

Indexed as

attitudescommunicable diseasescommunicationepidemiologyhealth behaviorhealthcare personnelhealth knowledgeimmunizationinfectious diseasespandemicpracticevaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID34358132
PMCPMC8310254

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.