Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35306625›Full record

ArticleMonash bioethics review2022

Intervention hesitancy among healthcare personnel: conceptualizing beyond vaccine hesitancy.

Rachel Gur-Arie, Nadav Davidovitch, Anat Rosenthal

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Monash bioethics review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Supporting healthcare workers in vaccination efforts.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Rachel Gur-ArieBerman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Deering Hall, 1809 Ashland Avenue, 21205, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. rgurari1@jhu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0868-7682
Nadav DavidovitchDepartment of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be'er Sheva, Israel.
Anat RosenthalDepartment of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be'er Sheva, Israel.
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev · ILJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Wellcome Trust Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We propose an emerging conceptualization of "intervention hesitancy" to address a broad spectrum of hesitancy to disease prevention interventions among healthcare personnel (HCP) beyond vaccine hesitancy. To demonstrate this concept and its analytical benefits, we used a qualitative case-study methodology, identifying a "spectrum" of disease prevention interventions based on (1) the intervention's effectiveness, (2) how the intervention is regulated among HCP in the Israeli healthcare system, and (3) uptake among HCP in the Israeli healthcare system. Our cases ultimately contribute to a more nuanced conceptualization of hesitancy that HCP express towards disease prevention interventions. Our case interventions included the seasonal influenza vaccine, the Mantoux test, and the hepatitis B (HBV) vaccine. Influenza and HBV are vaccine-preventable diseases, though their respective vaccines vary significantly in effectiveness and uptake among HCP. The Mantoux test is a tuberculin skin test which provides a prevention benchmark for tuberculosis (TB), a non-vaccine preventable disease. We conducted semi-structured interviews with relevant stakeholders and analyzed them within Israeli and international policy context between 2016 and 2019, a period just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. We propose the conceptualization of "intervention hesitancy"-beyond "vaccine hesitancy"-as "hesitancy towards a wide range of public health interventions, including but not limited to vaccines". Results suggested that intervention hesitancy among HCP is rooted in weak trust in their employer, poor employment conditions, as well as mixed institutional guidelines and culture. Conceptualizing intervention hesitancy expands the ability of healthcare systems to understand the root of hesitancy and foster a supportive institutional culture and trust, cognizant of diverse disease prevention interventions beyond vaccination.

Indexed as

COVID-19Influenza VaccinesDelivery of Health CareHealth PersonnelHumansPandemicsInfluenza VaccinesHealthcare personnelInfection controlIntervention hesitancyNonpharmaceutical interventionsOccupational healthPolicyTrustVaccines

Identifiers

PMID35306625
PMCPMC8934537
OpenAlexW4220758835

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.