ArticleJMIR infodemiology
Health Care Providers' Trusted Sources for Information About COVID-19 Vaccines: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in JMIR infodemiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does the messenger make the difference? Perceived reliability of health information sources during the COVID-19 pandemic in multi-ethnic Malaysia.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Quality Assessment of Health Information on Social Media During a Public Health Crisis: Infodemiology Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Veterans' Experiences with COVID-19 and How Providers Can Shape Care and Perception with Empathy.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- COVID-19 vaccine uptake, barriers and associated factors among healthcare workers in Malawi.Journal of public health in Africa · 2025Article
- Understanding uptake of information about innovations among emergency department clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2024Article
- Review
- Article
- Understanding COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance among Healthcare Workers in Indonesia: Lessons from Multi-Site Survey.Vaccines · 2024Article
- Key Conversations and Trusted Information Among Hesitant Adopters of the COVID-19 Vaccine.Journal of health communication · 2023Article
- Article
- Rural-Urban Differences in Vaccination and Hesitancy Rates and Trust: US COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey on a Social Media Platform, May 2021-April 2022.American journal of public health · 2023Article
- COVID-19 vaccine concerns of health care providers and ancillary staff.Pediatric research · 2023Article
- COVID-19 Vaccine Perspective Among University Lecturers and Students: A Qualitative Study of Pre Implementation of Vaccination.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
- Article
- Seroprevalence survey of SARS-CoV-2, community behaviors, and practices in Kansanshi and Kalumbila mining towns.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy between teachers and students in a college, a cross-sectional study in China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- Experience of COVID-19 Vaccination among Primary Healthcare Workers in Hong Kong: A Qualitative Study.Vaccines · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInformation and opinions shared by health care providers can affect patient vaccination decisions, but little is known about who health care providers themselves trust for information in the context of new COVID-19 vaccines.
objectiveThe purpose of this study is to investigate which sources of information about COVID-19 vaccines are trusted by health care providers and how they communicate this information to patients.
methodsThis mixed methods study involved a one-time, web-based survey of health care providers and qualitative interviews with a subset of survey respondents. Health care providers (physicians, advanced practice providers, pharmacists, nurses) were recruited from an integrated health system in Southern California using voluntary response sampling, with follow-up interviews with providers who either accepted or declined a COVID-19 vaccine. The outcome was the type of information sources that respondents reported trusting for information about COVID-19 vaccines. Bivariate tests were used to compare trusted information sources by provider type; thematic analysis was used to explore perspectives about vaccine information and communicating with patients about vaccines.
resultsThe survey was completed by 2948 providers, of whom 91% (n=2683) responded that they had received ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The most frequently trusted source of COVID-19 vaccine information was government agencies (n=2513, 84.2%); the least frequently trusted source was social media (n=691, 9.5%). More physicians trusted government agencies (n=1226, 93%) than nurses (n=927, 78%) or pharmacists (n=203, 78%;
conclusionsPhysicians have stronger trust in government sources and their employers for information about COVID-19 vaccines compared with nurses, pharmacists, and advanced practice providers. Strategies such as role modeling, tailored messaging, or talking points with standard language may help providers to communicate accurate COVID-19 vaccine information to patients, and these strategies may also be used with providers with lower levels of trust in reputable information sources.
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.