Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34960171›Full record

ArticleVaccines2021

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers in Southern California: Not Just "Anti" vs. "Pro" Vaccine.

Alex Dubov, Brian J Distelberg, Jacinda C Abdul-Mutakabbir, W Lawrence Beeson, Lawrence K Loo, Susanne B Montgomery, Udochukwu E Oyoyo, Pranjal Patel, Bridgette Peteet, Steven Shoptaw and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Prevalence, nature, and determinants of COVID-19-related conspiracy theories among healthcare workers: a scoping review.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Addressing vaccine hesitancy and resistance for COVID-19 vaccines.International journal of nursing studies · 2022
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Exploring the intersection of racism, antimicrobial resistance, and vaccine equity.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2022
    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

12 authors.

Alex DubovSchool of Behavioral Health, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2940-0254
Brian J DistelbergSchool of Behavioral Health, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.
Jacinda C Abdul-MutakabbirSchool of Pharmacy, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4162-6408
W Lawrence BeesonSchool of Public Health, Loma Linda University Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7415-6046
Lawrence K LooSchool of Medicine, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.
Susanne B MontgomerySchool of Behavioral Health, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1269-9034
Udochukwu E OyoyoSchool of Dentistry, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.
Pranjal PatelSchool of Medicine, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4031-9545
Bridgette PeteetSchool of Behavioral Health, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2429-3445
Steven ShoptawDepartment of Family Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90032, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3583-0026
Shahriyar TavakoliSchool of Medicine, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.
Ara A ChrissianSchool of Medicine, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350, USA.

Funding

UCLA Rapid, Relevant, Rigorous Implementation Science HubP30MH058107 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI Sung-Jae Lee · 1997 to 2026
$53.5M
NIMH NIH HHS MH58107
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we evaluated the status of and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination of healthcare workers in two major hospital systems (academic and private) in Southern California. Responses were collected via an anonymous and voluntary survey from a total of 2491 participants, including nurses, physicians, other allied health professionals, and administrators. Among the 2491 participants that had been offered the vaccine at the time of the study, 2103 (84%) were vaccinated. The bulk of the participants were middle-aged college-educated White (73%), non-Hispanic women (77%), and nursing was the most represented medical occupation (35%). Political affiliation, education level, and income were shown to be significant factors associated with vaccination status. Our data suggest that the current allocation of healthcare workers into dichotomous groups such as "anti-vaccine vs. pro-vaccine" may be inadequate in accurately tailoring vaccine uptake interventions. We found that healthcare workers that have yet to receive the COVID-19 vaccine likely belong to one of four categories: the misinformed, the undecided, the uninformed, or the unconcerned. This diversity in vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers highlights the importance of targeted intervention to increase vaccine confidence. Regardless of governmental vaccine mandates, addressing the root causes contributing to vaccine hesitancy continues to be of utmost importance.

Indexed as

COVID-19 pandemicCOVID-19 vaccinehealthcare professionalsSARS-CoV-2vaccine acceptancevaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID34960171
PMCPMC8706436

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.