ReviewVaccines2022
COVID-19 Vaccination and Medical Liability: An International Perspective in 18 Countries.
Review in Vaccines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Predictors of parental acceptance to live attenuated influenza vaccine for children.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Article
- A solution towards a viable compensation mechanism for injury from COVID-19 vaccines in Malaysia: A qualitative study.Heliyon · 2024Article
- The "Criminal Shield": Criminal Liability for Healthcare Professionals during the COVID-19 Pandemic.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Three-year COVID-19 and flu vaccinations among medical residents in a tertiary hospital in Italy: The threat of acceptance decline in seasonal campaigns.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023Article
- Review
- Low impact of regular PCR testing on presence at work site during the COVID-19 pandemic: experiences during an open observational study in Lower Saxony 2020-21.BMC public health · 2023Observational
- Impact of COVID-19 on Uro-Oncological Patients: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature.Microorganisms · 2023Review
- Alcohol Consumption in the Workplace: A Comparison between European Union Countries' Policies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- VACS: VAccination disComfort Scale.Clinics and practice · 2022Article
- COVID-19 Vaccinations: Medical, Ethical and Legal Aspects.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2022Review
- Employee Participation in Workplace Vaccination Campaigns: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Vaccines · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 vaccination has proven to be the most effective prevention measure, reducing deaths and hospitalizations and allowing, in combination with non-pharmacological interventions, the pandemic to be tackled. Although most of the adverse reactions to vaccination present mild symptoms and serious effects are very rare, they can be the cause of legal action against the healthcare workers (HCWs) who administered it. To highlight differences in the medical liability systems, we performed a search for the three most populous countries in each continent on vaccine injury compensation programs, new laws or policies to protect HCWs administering vaccinations introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic, and policies on mandatory vaccinations, on literature databases and institutional sites. We found that in seven countries the medical liability system is based on Common Law, while in eleven it is mainly based on Civil Law. Considering the application of specific laws to protect HCWs who vaccinate during the pandemic, only the USA and Canada provided immunity from liability. Among the countries we analyzed, fourteen have adopted compensation funds. From an international perspective, our results highlight that in eleven (61.1%) countries medical liability is mainly based on Civil Law, whilst in seven (38.9%) it is based on Common Law.
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.