Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35632514›Full record

ArticleVaccines2022

COVID-19 Booster Vaccination Hesitancy in the United States: A Multi-Theory-Model (MTM)-Based National Assessment.

Kavita Batra, Manoj Sharma, Chia-Liang Dai, Jagdish Khubchandani

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 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Vaccine Literacy and Vaccination: A Systematic Review.International journal of public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. COVID-19 vaccine literacy: A scoping review.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Drivers of COVID-19 booster uptake among nurses.American journal of infection control · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Kavita BatraTrauma and Critical Care, Department of Medical Education, Kirk Kerkorian School of Medicine, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89102, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0722-0191
Manoj SharmaDepartment of Social and Behavioral Health, School of Public Health, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89119, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4624-2414
Chia-Liang DaiDepartment of Teaching and Learning, College of Education, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA.
Jagdish KhubchandaniDepartment of Public Health Sciences, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9058-4278

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Despite the availability of COVID-19 vaccines and the proven benefits of vaccinations outweighing the potential risks, hesitancy to accept vaccines and additional doses remains a persistent problem. Therefore, the purpose of the study was to investigate hesitancy, confidence, literacy, and the role of the multi-theory model (MTM) constructs in COVID-19 booster uptake. Methods: This cross-sectional study utilized a 52-item psychometric valid web-based survey conducted during the month of October 2021 to recruit a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults. Univariate, bivariate, and multivariate statistical tests were used to analyze the data. Results: Among the booster hesitant group (n = 209, 41.7%), a significantly larger proportion of respondents were unvaccinated with the primary series (43.5% vs. 11%, p < 0.001), were among 18−44 years age group (51.2% vs. 31.8%, p < 0.001), single or never married (33.0% vs. 24.3%, p = 0.04), had lower education with some high school (6.2% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.03), and identified themselves as Republicans (31.6% vs. 20.5%, p = 0.01). The hesitant group had lower mean scores of vaccine literacy, and vaccine confidence, and had 19% lower odds of behavioral confidence than their non-hesitant counterparts (adjusted odds ratio = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.71−0.92). Conclusions: The findings of this study underscore the need of raising public awareness through effective multi-theory-model-based communication campaigns.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2vaccine boostervaccine confidencevaccine literacy

Identifiers

PMID35632514
PMCPMC9144395

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.