SynthesisFrontiers in public health2022
COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Pakistan: A Mini Review of the Published Discourse.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breaking barriers in health surveillance: privacy-preserving techniques for tracking vaccine hesitancy and disease outbreaks in Pakistan.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional study of the predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Pakistan.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Trajectory of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy post-vaccination and public's intention to take booster vaccines: A cross-sectional analysis.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023Article
- COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and attitudes in Pakistan: a cross-sectional phone survey of major urban cities.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, Perceptions, and Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccination among Pharmacy and Non-Pharmacy Students.Vaccines · 2023Article
- Short-term adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines after the first, second, and booster doses: a cross-sectional survey from Punjab, Pakistan, and the implications.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2023Article
- Vaccine hesitancy and post-vaccination adherence to safety measures: A mixed-method study.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Cholera outbreak amidst an economic crisis and Covid-19 pandemic in Pakistan.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This minireview provides a summary of the main findings, features, as well as limitations and gaps in the current epidemiologic research on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (VH) in Pakistani population. For this purpose, data on VH studies were extracted from January 2020 to October 2021, using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. Literature review and other narrative studies were excluded. There exists a significant heterogeneity in the reported vaccine hesitancy in the population (pooled estimates from random-effects meta-analysis: 35% (95% CI, 28-43%). However, none of the co-variables included in the studies explained the observed variance/heterogeneity in the moderator analysis models. In this minireview and critical appraisal of current VH research, we conclude that an in-depth analysis of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a representative sample of Pakistani population is crucial to measure the magnitude of VH as well to explore and identify the determinants of VH in Pakistani population. This is an important step toward informing intervention and policy design and to address this issue at its root cause. To this end, focused, methodologically robust and hypothesis-driven VH research is needed using a wide range of co-variables to support a detailed coverage of the individual and environmental level VH attributes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.