Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35301774›Full record

ReviewJournal of advanced nursing2022

A large cross-sectional survey of COVID-19 vaccination willingness amongst healthcare students and professionals: Reveals generational patterns.

Marco Tomietto, Valentina Simonetti, Dania Comparcini, Pasquale Stefanizzi, Giancarlo Cicolini

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of advanced nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Profiling vaccine hesitancy in nursing to tailor public healthcare policies: A cross-sectional international study.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Marco TomiettoDepartment of Nursing, Midwifery and Health, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3813-1490
Valentina SimonettiDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7185-4850
Dania ComparciniPolitecnica delle Marche University of Ancona, Ancona, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3622-6370
Pasquale StefanizziResearch Unit of Nursing Science and Health Management, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3279-0196
Giancarlo CicoliniDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2736-1792
University of Bari Aldo Moro · ITMarche Polytechnic University · ITNorthumbria University · GBOulu University of Applied Sciences · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo determine coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination hesitancy in healthcare professionals and healthcare students in Italy across four generations (baby boomers, generations X, Y and Z).

designA cross-sectional descriptive study was performed through an online survey conducted from May to June 2021. The STROBE guidelines were adopted for reporting.

methodsData were collected by initially sending a survey link to a convenience sample of healthcare professionals and students, which was followed by snowball sampling. The VAX scale was validated and adopted. An ANOVA was performed to detect differences in vaccine-hesitancy beliefs between the four generational groups.

resultsThe survey was completed by 1226 healthcare professionals and students. Worries about unforeseen future effects accounted for the higher vaccination hesitancy factor across generations. More positive attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination were expressed by members of generation Z than by members of generation Y and baby boomers. Members of generation X had the highest vaccination hesitancy scores in the overall scale.

conclusionThe results suggest that public health campaigns should take into account the generational differences in COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy to achieve higher levels of vaccine acceptance, including amongst healthcare professionals and students. IMPACT: Vaccination is the most effective strategy to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic. The advice of health professionals strongly influences vaccination willingness in the general population. A consideration of the generational patterns in the COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy of healthcare workers and students may increase vaccination uptake in these populations, which in turn may lead to greater public acceptance of the vaccine.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesCOVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansPandemicsStudentsVaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesCOVID-19 vaccinenursingvaccination adherencevaccination attitudesvaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID35301774
PMCPMC9111790
OpenAlexW4220878746

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.