ArticleVaccines2022
Pre-Impressions of the Third COVID-19 Vaccination among Medical Staff: A Text Mining-Based Survey.
Article in Vaccines, 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.
- Acceptance of the COVID-19 Booster Vaccine Amid the Omicron JN.1 Surge in Southern Bangladesh: A Comparative Analysis of Rural-Urban Disparities.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026Observational
- Article
- Article
- Exploratory bibliometric analysis and text mining to reveal research trends in cardiac aging.Aging medicine (Milton (N.S.W)) · 2024Article
- Global disparities in COVID-19 vaccine booster dose (VBD) acceptance and hesitancy: An updated narrative review.Vaccine: X · 2024Review
- Article
- Comparison of Impressions of COVID-19 Vaccination and Influenza Vaccination in Japan by Analyzing Social Media Using Text Mining.Vaccines · 2023Article
- COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Dose Acceptance: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the pre-impressions of the third Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination among Japanese medical staff using quantitative analysis. Among 413 medical staff, 260 (60 men and 200 women) aged 40.4 ± 12.3 years were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Pre-impressions of the third COVID-19 vaccination were analyzed using the text-mining analysis software, KH coder. Among 260 subjects, 242 (93.1%) agreed to the third vaccination, with the rate being lower among subjects in their 30s (87.3%) than those in the other age groups. The word "side effects" was characteristic of subjects in their 20s and nurses, and "pregnancy" of those in their 30s and administrative staff. Pre-impressions of the third COVID-19 vaccination varied among age groups and different professions. The results obtained provide useful information for promoting the third COVID-19 vaccination to Japanese adults.
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.