ArticleGaceta sanitaria
[Cognitive, ethical, social and political aspects in risk assessment: regarding vaccines against SARS-CoV-2].
Article in Gaceta sanitaria. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beliefs and Attitudes of Hesitant Spaniards Towards COVID-19 Vaccines: "A Personal Decision".Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Risk is a concept that is usually evaluated by scientists and public health experts by comparing probabilities. However, this ethical utilitarian perspective, which considers that the best decision is the one that has less probability of harm than of benefit, does not consider normative aspects based on other ethical perspectives. Interpreting the origin of public controversies arising from people's reactions to the small risks of attenuated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and evaluating the responses of public institutions requires an understanding of both the cognitive aspects that introduce systematic biases in the assessment of probabilities and the sociological, ethical, and political framework that contextualizes risk management in modern societies.
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.