Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35335061›Full record

ArticleVaccines2022

Public Reaction towards the Potential Side Effects of a COVID-19 Vaccine: An Italian Cross-Sectional Study.

Serena Barello, Lorenzo Palamenghi, Guendalina Graffigna

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Serena BarelloEngageMinds HUB-Consumer, Food & Health Engagement Research Center, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 20123 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8514-2563
Lorenzo PalamenghiEngageMinds HUB-Consumer, Food & Health Engagement Research Center, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 20123 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8222-3915
Guendalina GraffignaEngageMinds HUB-Consumer, Food & Health Engagement Research Center, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 20123 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4378-7467

Funding

Fondazione Cariplo N/ARegione Lombardia N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In March 2021, the possible link between the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine and some cases of blood clots lead several governments to suspend the administration of said vaccine, or to adjust their administration strategies, regardless of the fact that both EMA and WHO claimed the benefits of the vaccine to far outweigh its risks. The lack of a coordinated decision-making process between different health authorities possibly had an impact on people's trust in the health authorities themselves, and on their willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19. In this study, we assessed the impact of the Astrazeneca case on a sample of 1000 Italian participants. The results demonstrate that a large part of the population is willing to delay the vaccination to be granted a vaccine perceived as "better". We also assessed the importance of several socio-demographic and psychological factors in predicting hesitancy and discuss the implications for public communication strategies.

Indexed as

COVID-19public healthpublic health communicationvaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID35335061
PMCPMC8952693

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.