Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35897309›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Perception of COVID-19 Booster Dose Vaccine among Healthcare Workers in India and Saudi Arabia.

Sajith Vellappally, Sachin Naik, Omar Alsadon, Abdulaziz Abdullah Al-Kheraif, Haya Alayadi, Areej Jaber Alsiwat, Aswini Kumar, Mohamed Hashem, Nibu Varghese, Nebu George Thomas and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Drivers of COVID-19 booster uptake among nurses.American journal of infection control · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Sajith VellappallyDental Health Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
Sachin NaikDental Biomaterials Research Chair, Dental Health Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-8962-0606
Omar AlsadonDental Health Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
Abdulaziz Abdullah Al-KheraifDental Biomaterials Research Chair, Dental Health Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
Haya AlayadiDental Health Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
Areej Jaber AlsiwatDental Health Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
Aswini KumarDepartment of Prosthodontics, Amritha School of Dentistry, Vishwavidyapeetham, Cochin 682041, KL, India.
Mohamed HashemDental Health Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
Nibu VargheseMACFAST, Tiruvalla 689101, KL, India.
Nebu George ThomasDepartment of Periodontology, Pushpagiri College of Dental Sciences, Thiruvalla 689107, KL, India.
Sukumaran AnilDepartment of Dentistry, Oral Health Institute, Hamad Medical Cooperation, Doha 3050, Qatar.ORCID 0000-0002-6440-8780
King Saud University · SAAmrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham · INHamad Medical Corporation · QAPushpagiri Medical College · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: COVID-19 vaccines were made available to the public by the end of 2020. However, little is known about COVID-19 booster dose (CBD) vaccine perception among healthcare workers (HCW) worldwide. The present study aims to assess the perception of CBD vaccines among healthcare workers in India and Saudi Arabia (SA). Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs in two countries, India and SA. Data were gathered through the use of a self-administered questionnaire. A convenience sampling technique was utilized to collect the data. Results: A total of 833 HCW responses were collected from the two countries, with 530 participants from India and 303 participants from SA responding to the questionnaire. Among them, 16% from India and 33% from SA were unwilling to take a CBD (p < 0.005). The primary reasons for not being willing were concerns about whether the vaccine would be effective (32%) and concerns about probable long-term side effects (31%). Concerns about not knowing enough about the vaccination (30%) and the possibility of long-term side effects (28%) were the primary concerns in SA. Regression analysis showed that males, urban residents, and post-graduates were more willing to take the CBD. Conclusion: There is a good perception of CBD and some hesitancy in receiving the booster dose among HCWs in both countries. The introduction of personalized education, risk communication, and deliberate policy could help to reduce the number of people who are unwilling to take a booster shot.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHealth PersonnelHumansMalePerceptionSaudi ArabiaCOVID-19 VaccinesawarenessCOVID-19COVID-19 vaccineshealth personnelIndiaSaudi Arabiavaccination hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID35897309
PMCPMC9332579
OpenAlexW4286717012

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.