Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34671900›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2022

Vaccine Hesitancy and Exposure to Misinformation: a Survey Analysis.

Stephen R Neely, Christina Eldredge, Robin Ersing, Christa Remington

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
42.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

83 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 140 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Who Falls for Misinformation and Why?Personality & social psychology bulletin · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

23 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephen R NeelySchool of Public Affairs, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Ave, SOC 107, Tampa, FL, 33620, USA. srneely@usf.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9802-0859
Christina EldredgeSchool of Information, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Ave, CIS 1040, Tampa, FL, 33620, USA.
Robin ErsingSchool of Public Affairs, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Ave, SOC 107, Tampa, FL, 33620, USA.
Christa RemingtonSchool of Public Affairs, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Ave, SOC 107, Tampa, FL, 33620, USA.
University of South Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite the widespread availability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the USA, vaccine hesitancy continues to represent a significant impediment to the attainment of herd immunity and the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. This survey analysis provides an update for clinical healthcare providers and public health officials regarding current trends in misinformation exposure, as well as common objections to COVID-19 vaccination.

methodsWe conducted a web-based survey of 600 adults in the state of Florida between June 3 and June 14, 2021. Access to the sample was purchased through an industry-leading market research provider (Prodege MR), and survey respondents were selected using a stratified, quota sampling approach to ensure representativeness. Balanced quotas were determined (by region of the state) for gender, age, race, education, and ethnicity. The survey responses were analyzed using basic descriptive statistics, as well as chi-square testing and a logit regression model.

findingsHigh levels of misinformation exposure were observed among participants, with 73% reporting some exposure to misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines in the past 6 months. Exposure to misinformation was directly correlated with vaccine hesitancy. Among those who did not report any exposure to misinformation, 73.8% of respondents were vaccinated. That number fell to 62.9% with exposure to just one misinformation theme and 52.2% for six or more (χ DISCUSSION: The survey results add to previous research on misinformation and vaccine hesitancy by quantifying exposure to specific misinformation themes and identifying its relationship to vaccine hesitancy. Overcoming these impediments to vaccination will require strategic and targeted messaging on the part of public health professionals, which may be aided by collaboration with political thought leaders. Understanding the volume and nature of misinformation themes the public is exposed to regarding COVID-19 vaccines may aid public health officials in targeting this vaccine messaging to more directly address reasons for vaccine hesitancy.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesAdultCommunicationHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesVaccinationVaccination HesitancyCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID34671900
PMCPMC8528483
OpenAlexW3205457306

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.