Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34415969›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Peoples' understanding, acceptance, and perceived challenges of vaccination against COVID-19: A cross-sectional study in Bangladesh.

Alak Paul, Dwaipayan Sikdar, Janardan Mahanta, Sanjib Ghosh, Md Akib Jabed, Sujat Paul, Fahmida Yeasmin, Suranjana Sikdar, Bishawjit Chowdhury, Tapan Kumar Nath

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

10 authors.

Alak PaulDepartment of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Chittagong, Chittagong, Bangladesh.ORCID 0000-0001-8934-8182
Dwaipayan SikdarDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Chittagong, Chittagong, Bangladesh.ORCID 0000-0003-0529-4696
Janardan MahantaDepartment of Statistics, University of Chittagong, Chittagong, Bangladesh.ORCID 0000-0002-7619-8266
Sanjib GhoshDepartment of Statistics, University of Chittagong, Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Md Akib JabedResearch Associate, Center for Participatory Research and Development (CPRD), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Sujat PaulDepartment of Medicine, Chittagong Medical College, Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Fahmida YeasminDepartment of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Chittagong, Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Suranjana SikdarDepartment of Microbiology, University of Chittagong, Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Bishawjit ChowdhuryDepartment of Medicine, Chittagong Medical College, Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Tapan Kumar NathUniversity of Nottingham Malaysia, Semenyih, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In order to eliminate COVID-19, many countries provided vaccinations. However, success depends on peoples' knowledge levels and rates of acceptance. But, previous research on this topic is currently lacking in Bangladesh. This cross-sectional study aimed at to investigate Bangladeshi peoples' knowledge, acceptance, and perception of challenges regarding COVID-19 vaccines. Quantitative data were collected using an online survey (n = 1975) and face-to-face interviews (n = 2200) with a pre-tested structured questionnaire. In addition, seven open-ended interviews were conducted with health experts regarding challenges of vaccination. Binary logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the association between explanatory and dependent variables. Effect size was estimated to understand the magnitude of relationship between two variables. Of 4175 respondents, 92.6% knew about COVID-19 vaccines, while only 37.4% believed vaccines to be effective in controlling COVID-19. Nearly 46% of respondents believed that COVID-19 vaccines have side-effects, and 16.4% of respondents believed that side-effects could be life-threatening. Only 60.5% of respondents indicated that they would receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Out of 1650 respondents (39.5%) who did not intend to receive the vaccine, 948 (57.4%) believed that they would be naturally protected. Regressions results indicated that men had higher rates of knowledge regarding the vaccine. In addition, rural respondents demonstrated lower knowledge regarding the vaccine. Furthermore, education had a significant association with knowledge of COVID-19 vaccines. Respondents with university education had more knowledge regarding the vaccine (Odds ratio, OR = 29.99; 95% confidence interval, CI 11.40-78.90, effect size 1.88; p = 0.01) and correct dosage (OR 27.34; 95% CI 15.25-49.00, effect size 1.83; p = 0.01). However, women (OR 1.16; 95% CI 0.96-1.40, effect size 0.08) and rural (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.07-1.44, effect size 0.12; p = 0.01) respondents were more enthusiastic regarding receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Higher educated respondents showed higher probability of receiving the vaccine. Those who believed in the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine were 11.57 times more interested (OR 11.57; 95% CI 8.92-15.01, effect size 1.35; p = 0.01) in receiving the vaccine. Open-ended interviews identified several challenges toward successful COVID-19 vaccination. Mass awareness creation, uninterrupted supply, equitable distribution, and sectoral coordination were suggested to achieve at least 70% immunization across the country.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedBangladeshCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedRural PopulationSurveys and QuestionnairesUrban PopulationCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID34415969
PMCPMC8378750

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.